EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anil Shukla
dblp:161/4030
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-6132-9489ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 10 · 3 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | On Proof Systems for #QBF (Short Paper)abstractFor a quantified Boolean formula (QBF), the problem of computing the number of winning strategies is known as the #QBF problem. This problem is considered harder than the analogous #SAT problem. Recently, important proof systems for QBFs and #SAT have been studied. By extending the ideas from both fields, we show that it is possible to design proof systems for #QBF. Such proof systems are important not only for advancing the theory of #QBF but also for certifying and designing better #QBF solvers, an area that is still in its early stages. In this paper, we explore #QBF proof systems to count the number of Skolem functions. In addition to a naive system, we study #QBF systems based on the ∀-expansion rule of QBFs. We observe that these systems have inherent structural weaknesses that lead to lower bounds. As an alternative, we propose a #QBF proof system that we call Q-MICE, which consists of sound inference rules for computing and certifying the #QBF solution, similar to the line-based #SAT proof system MICE. To demonstrate the strength of Q-MICE, we present various upper bounds, such as the quantified version of the propositional XOR-PAIRS formula, which are known to be hard for MICE. Consequently, we also separate Q-MICE from ∀-expansion based #QBF proof systems. Sravanthi Chede, Leroy Chew, Vaibhav Krishan, Anil Shukla |
SAT | 4 |
| 2024 | Circuits, Proofs and Propositional Model Counting
Sravanthi Chede, Leroy Chew, Anil Shukla |
FSTTCS | 3 |
| 2023 | Extending Merge Resolution to a Family of QBF-Proof Systems
Sravanthi Chede, Anil Shukla |
STACS | 2 |
| 2018 | Understanding cutting planes for QBFs
Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
Inf. Comput. | 4 |
| 2018 | Are Short Proofs Narrow? QBF Resolution Is Not So SimpleabstractThe ground-breaking paper “Short Proofs Are Narrow -- Resolution Made Simple” by Ben-Sasson and Wigderson (J. ACM 2001) introduces what is today arguably the main technique to obtain resolution lower bounds: to show a lower bound for the width of proofs. Another important measure for resolution is space, and in their fundamental work, Atserias and Dalmau (J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 2008) show that lower bounds for space again can be obtained via lower bounds for width. In this article, we assess whether similar techniques are effective for resolution calculi for quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs). There are a number of different QBF resolution calculi like Q-resolution (the classical extension of propositional resolution to QBF) and the more recent calculi ∀Exp+Res and IR-calc. For these systems, a mixed picture emerges. Our main results show that the relations both between size and width and between space and width drastically fail in Q-resolution, even in its weaker tree-like version. On the other hand, we obtain positive results for the expansion-based resolution systems ∀Exp+Res and IR-calc, however, only in the weak tree-like models. Technically, our negative results rely on showing width lower bounds together with simultaneous upper bounds for size and space. For our positive results, we exhibit space and width-preserving simulations between QBF resolution calculi. Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
ACM Trans. Comput. Log. | 4 |
| 2017 | Feasible Interpolation for QBF Resolution CalculiabstractIn sharp contrast to classical proof complexity we are currently short of lower bound techniques for QBF proof systems. In this paper we establish the feasible interpolation technique for all resolution-based QBF systems, whether modelling CDCL or expansion-based solving. This both provides the first general lower bound method for QBF proof systems as well as largely extends the scope of classical feasible interpolation. We apply our technique to obtain new exponential lower bounds to all resolution-based QBF systems for a new class of QBF formulas based on the clique problem. Finally, we show how feasible interpolation relates to the recently established lower bound method based on strategy extraction. Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
Log. Methods Comput. Sci. | 4 |
| 2016 | Understanding Cutting Planes for QBFsabstractWe define a cutting planes system CP+ForallRed for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF) and analyse the proof-theoretic strength of this new calculus. While in the propositional case, Cutting Planes is of intermediate strength between resolution and Frege, our findings here show that the situation in QBF is slightly more complex: while CP+ForallRed is again weaker than QBF Frege and stronger than the CDCL-based QBF resolution systems Q-Res and QU-Res, it turns out to be incomparable to even the weakest expansion-based QBF resolution system ForallExp+Res. Technically, our results establish the effectiveness of two lower bound techniques for CP+ForallRed: via strategy extraction and via monotone feasible interpolation. Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
FSTTCS | 4 |
| 2016 | Are Short Proofs Narrow? QBF Resolution is not SimpleabstractThe groundbreaking paper 'Short proofs are narrow - resolution made simple' by Ben-Sasson and Wigderson (J. ACM 2001) introduces what is today arguably the main technique to obtain resolution lower bounds: to show a lower bound for the width of proofs. Another important measure for resolution is space, and in their fundamental work, Atserias and Dalmau (J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 2008) show that space lower bounds again can be obtained via width lower bounds. Here we assess whether similar techniques are effective for resolution calculi for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). A mixed picture emerges. Our main results show that both the relations between size and width as well as between space and width drastically fail in Q-resolution, even in its weaker tree-like version. On the other hand, we obtain positive results for the expansion-based resolution systems Forall-Exp+Res and IR-calc, however only in the weak tree-like models. Technically, our negative results rely on showing width lower bounds together with simultaneous upper bounds for size and space. For our positive results we exhibit space and width-preserving simulations between QBF resolution calculi. Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
STACS | 4 |
| 2016 | Level-ordered Q-resolution and tree-like Q-resolution are incomparable
Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
Inf. Process. Lett. | 2 |
| 2015 | Feasible Interpolation for QBF Resolution Calculi
Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, Anil Shukla |
ICALP (1) | 4 |