Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Oh you're one of the GPUShareSat guys, I forgot about that one. Would you say the main obstacle to scaling to a million processors is the synchronization overhead or are there certain instances from the SATComp benchmark that exhibited poor scaling with increased parallelism? Do you think sharing is essential or do you have any ideas how to improve communication-free strategies, i.e., parallelism without clause sharing using divide-and-conquer or randomized search? Six years ago, your co-author Mate wrote a very pessimistic remark on GPU-based SAT solvers here [1], I'm curious whether he still believes this or if his option was changed during the course of the project and what changed his mind? Thanks!

[1]: https://qht.co/item?id=13667565



Hahha, I am Mate :) I still think that GPGPU can't help in the core of the algorithm. However, I was pleasantly surprised with Nicolas' work. He is a proper magician, and he had a great idea and made it work. Notice that he didn't make the GPU do propagation/conflict generation. Instead, he used it to better distribute clauses between the threads that do all of that. In a way, he improved clause cleaning. When I saw his work, I was very-very happy.

I still hold that GPGPUs can't do CDCL. However, they may be helpful in some of its sub-parts, or may be able to run another algorithm for solving SAT that we haven't invented yet.

Just my 2 cents,

Mate




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: