Model Counting in the Wild

Read original: arXiv:2408.07059 - Published 8/14/2024 by Arijit Shaw, Kuldeep S. Meel

Overview

Explores the problem of model counting in the real world
Presents a preliminary version of this work at the 21st International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
Benchmarks and log files available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13284882

Plain English Explanation

This paper investigates the challenge of model counting, which is the process of determining the number of possible solutions or models for a given problem. The researchers present their preliminary findings on this topic, which were previously shared at a major conference on knowledge representation and reasoning. The paper's benchmarks and detailed logs of the experiments are publicly available for others to review and build upon.

Technical Explanation

The paper explores the practical application of model counting techniques in real-world scenarios, going beyond the theoretical work that has been the focus of much prior research. The authors discuss the unique challenges that arise when trying to apply model counting in the wild, such as dealing with large and complex problem instances, noisy or incomplete data, and the need for scalable and efficient algorithms.

The paper describes the experimental setup used by the researchers, including the dataset of problem instances they analyzed and the model counting approaches they evaluated. They provide detailed insights into the performance and limitations of different model counting techniques in handling these realistic problem settings.

Critical Analysis

The paper acknowledges the preliminary nature of this work and the need for further research to fully understand the barriers to effective model counting in practice. While the authors have made their benchmarks and logs publicly available, which is commendable, there may be additional caveats or limitations to the data and experimental design that are not explicitly discussed.

Additionally, the paper does not delve into the potential societal implications or ethical considerations surrounding the application of model counting techniques, which could be an important area for future investigation, especially as these methods become more widely adopted.

Conclusion

This paper represents an important step in bridging the gap between theoretical model counting research and the real-world challenges faced by practitioners. By exploring the obstacles and trade-offs involved in applying these techniques in the wild, the authors lay the groundwork for the development of more robust and practical model counting solutions. The availability of the benchmarks and logs will likely spur further research and innovation in this critical field.

This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Model Counting in the Wild

Arijit Shaw, Kuldeep S. Meel

Model counting is a fundamental problem in automated reasoning with applications in probabilistic inference, network reliability, neural network verification, and more. Although model counting is computationally intractable from a theoretical perspective due to its #P-completeness, the past decade has seen significant progress in developing state-of-the-art model counters to address scalability challenges. In this work, we conduct a rigorous assessment of the scalability of model counters in the wild. To this end, we surveyed 11 application domains and collected an aggregate of 2262 benchmarks from these domains. We then evaluated six state-of-the-art model counters on these instances to assess scalability and runtime performance. Our empirical evaluation demonstrates that the performance of model counters varies significantly across different application domains, underscoring the need for careful selection by the end user. Additionally, we investigated the behavior of different counters with respect to two parameters suggested by the model counting community, finding only a weak correlation. Our analysis highlights the challenges and opportunities for portfolio-based approaches in model counting.

8/14/2024

Formally Certified Approximate Model Counting

Yong Kiam Tan, Jiong Yang, Mate Soos, Magnus O. Myreen, Kuldeep S. Meel

Approximate model counting is the task of approximating the number of solutions to an input Boolean formula. The state-of-the-art approximate model counter for formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF), ApproxMC, provides a scalable means of obtaining model counts with probably approximately correct (PAC)-style guarantees. Nevertheless, the validity of ApproxMC's approximation relies on a careful theoretical analysis of its randomized algorithm and the correctness of its highly optimized implementation, especially the latter's stateful interactions with an incremental CNF satisfiability solver capable of natively handling parity (XOR) constraints. We present the first certification framework for approximate model counting with formally verified guarantees on the quality of its output approximation. Our approach combines: (i) a static, once-off, formal proof of the algorithm's PAC guarantee in the Isabelle/HOL proof assistant; and (ii) dynamic, per-run, verification of ApproxMC's calls to an external CNF-XOR solver using proof certificates. We detail our general approach to establish a rigorous connection between these two parts of the verification, including our blueprint for turning the formalized, randomized algorithm into a verified proof checker, and our design of proof certificates for both ApproxMC and its internal CNF-XOR solving steps. Experimentally, we show that certificate generation adds little overhead to an approximate counter implementation, and that our certificate checker is able to fully certify $84.7%$ of instances with generated certificates when given the same time and memory limits as the counter.

6/21/2024

Iterative Object Count Optimization for Text-to-image Diffusion Models

Oz Zafar, Lior Wolf, Idan Schwartz

We address a persistent challenge in text-to-image models: accurately generating a specified number of objects. Current models, which learn from image-text pairs, inherently struggle with counting, as training data cannot depict every possible number of objects for any given object. To solve this, we propose optimizing the generated image based on a counting loss derived from a counting model that aggregates an object's potential. Employing an out-of-the-box counting model is challenging for two reasons: first, the model requires a scaling hyperparameter for the potential aggregation that varies depending on the viewpoint of the objects, and second, classifier guidance techniques require modified models that operate on noisy intermediate diffusion steps. To address these challenges, we propose an iterated online training mode that improves the accuracy of inferred images while altering the text conditioning embedding and dynamically adjusting hyperparameters. Our method offers three key advantages: (i) it can consider non-derivable counting techniques based on detection models, (ii) it is a zero-shot plug-and-play solution facilitating rapid changes to the counting techniques and image generation methods, and (iii) the optimized counting token can be reused to generate accurate images without additional optimization. We evaluate the generation of various objects and show significant improvements in accuracy. The project page is available at https://ozzafar.github.io/count_token.

8/22/2024

💬

Language Models Need Inductive Biases to Count Inductively

Yingshan Chang, Yonatan Bisk

Counting is a fundamental example of generalization, whether viewed through the mathematical lens of Peano's axioms defining the natural numbers or the cognitive science literature for children learning to count. The argument holds for both cases that learning to count means learning to count infinitely. While few papers have tried to distill transformer reasoning to the simplest case of counting, investigating length generalization does occur throughout the literature. In the train short, test long paradigm of NLP, length refers to the training sentence length. In formal language recognition, length refers to the input sequence length, or the maximum stack size induced by a pushdown automata. In general problem solving, length refers to the number of hops in a deductive reasoning chain or the recursion depth. For all cases, counting is central to task success. And crucially, generalizing counting inductively is central to success on OOD instances. This work provides extensive empirical results on training language models to count. We experiment with architectures ranging from RNNs, Transformers, State-Space Models and RWKV. We present carefully-designed task formats, auxiliary tasks and positional embeddings to avoid limitations in generalization with OOD-position and OOD-vocabulary. We find that while traditional RNNs trivially achieve inductive counting, Transformers have to rely on positional embeddings to count out-of-domain. As counting is the basis for many arguments concerning the expressivity of Transformers, our finding calls for the community to reexamine the application scope of primitive functions defined in formal characterizations. Finally, modern RNNs also largely underperform traditional RNNs in generalizing counting inductively. We discuss how design choices that enable parallelized training of modern RNNs cause them to lose merits of a recurrent nature.

5/31/2024