Colors make theories hard
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), ISSN: 1611-3349, Vol: 9706, Page: 152-170
2016
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Conference Paper Description
The satisfiability problem for conjunctions of quantifier-free literals in first-order theories T of interest–“T -solving” for short–has been deeply investigated for more than three decades from both theoretical and practical perspectives, and it is currently a core issue of state-of-the-art SMT solving. Given some theory T of interest, a key theoretical problem is to establish the computational (in)tractability of T -solving, or to identify intractable fragments of T. In this paper we investigate this problem from a general perspective, and we present a simple and general criterion for establishing the NPhardness of T -solving, which is based on the novel concept of “colorer” for a theory T. As a proof of concept, we show the effectiveness and simplicity of this novel criterion by easily producing very simple proofs of the NP-hardness for many theories of interest for SMT, or of some of their fragments.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84976610701&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40229-1_11; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-40229-1_11; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-319-40229-1_11; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40229-1_11; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-40229-1_11
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know