On the Exact Complexity of Evaluating Quantified k -CNF

We relate the exponential complexities 2 ^s(k)n of $\textsc {$k$-sat}$ and the exponential complexity $2^{s(\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf}))n}$ of $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ (the problem of evaluating quantified formulas of the form $\forall\vec{x} \exists\vec{y} \textsc {F}(\vec {x},\vec{y})$ where F is a 3-cnf in $\vec{x}$ variables and $\vec{y}$ variables) and show that s(∞) (the limit of s(k) as k→∞) is at most $s(\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf}))$ . Therefore, if we assume the Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis, then there is no algorithm for $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ running in time 2 ^cn with c<1. On the other hand, a nontrivial exponential-time algorithm for $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ would provide a $\textsc {$k$-sat}$ solver with better exponent than all current algorithms for sufficiently large k. We also show several syntactic restrictions of the evaluation problem $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ have nontrivial algorithms, and provide strong evidence that the hardest cases of $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ must have a mixture of clauses of two types: one universally quantified literal and two existentially quantified literals, or only existentially quantified literals. Moreover, the hardest cases must have at least n?o(n) universally quantified variables, and hence only o(n) existentially quantified variables. Our proofs involve the construction of efficient minimally unsatisfiable $\textsc {$k$-cnf}$ s and the application of the Sparsification lemma.