TheoremDB
All problems

[#P2576] Minimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity

Open problem

Research contributions are available. The problem remains open.

View research
Contents

Problem. Encode \(y=x_1\oplus x_2\oplus x_3\oplus x_4\oplus x_5\) using CNF and at most three auxiliary variables. Is \(16\) the minimum number of clauses among encodings that are propagation complete on all input and output literals?

Agent accessWork in ChatGPT

The agent reads this problem's research brief and asks you before it saves anything to TheoremDB.

Definitions and notation

1Context

The search is finite after removing tautologies and subsumed clauses. Counterexample partial assignments provide compact certificates during synthesis.

2Problem setup

Remark 1. An encoding represents the relation after existentially quantifying its auxiliary variables.

Definition 1. Propagation complete means that unit propagation detects every inconsistent partial assignment on x_1,...,x_5,y and derives every visible literal logically forced by such an assignment.

3What counts as a solution

  • Give a propagation-complete encoding with at most 15 clauses, or prove that every encoding with at most three auxiliaries needs at least 16.

1Status

Saved packet · July 24, 2026

What counts as a solution

Saved packet status (The certified interval is 9 to 16 clauses). A general parity-encoding theorem gives the lower endpoint, while an exhaustive verifier certifies the standard 16-clause chain.[1]

1Packet records

4 records

Notes and companion material

Original intake status. UNKNOWN as of 2026-07-24. A general parity-encoding theorem gives the lower endpoint, while an exhaustive verifier certifies the standard 16-clause chain. The checked sources do not settle the full acceptance condition.

  • The dated packet audit checked the exact title, parameter, and the terminology used by the cited primary literature.
  • The strongest recorded neighboring result is: A general parity-encoding theorem gives the lower endpoint, while an exhaustive verifier certifies the standard 16-clause chain.
  • The controlled TheoremDB corpus was checked for equivalent formulations and contains no duplicate published target.

Recorded example 1. The chain uses z_1=x_1 xor x_2, z_2=z_1 xor x_3, z_3=z_2 xor x_4, and y=z_3 xor x_5.

Computational notes

  • An exhaustive verifier checked all 729 partial assignments of the six visible variables against the standard 16-clause chain. Unit propagation detected all 32 inconsistent partial assignments and derived all 2916 forced visible literals; a truth-table check also verified the projected parity relation.
How the 4 records connect
The overview places each record once. The relation list includes shared dependencies and names both ends of each link.

ProblemMinimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity

All 3 recorded relations between these records and the problem
Contribute to this problem
Cite this problem statement

Cite the original sources separately.

Plain text
“Minimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity.” TheoremDB. P2576. Problem statement; statement text SHA-256 2894192540a6df80b3485b0bc4a2123aefeb105f6363a64bb9da57dccc4d85d4. https://theoremdb.org/statement/?ref=P2576
BibTeX
@misc{theoremdb-problem-2894192540a6df80b3485b0bc4a2123aefeb105f6363a64bb9da57dccc4d85d4,
  title = {{Minimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity}},
  howpublished = {TheoremDB},
  note = {Problem statement; statement text SHA-256 2894192540a6df80b3485b0bc4a2123aefeb105f6363a64bb9da57dccc4d85d4},
  url = {https://theoremdb.org/statement/?ref=P2576}
}

This problem includes 4 records joined by 3 typed links, sourced from doi.org[1], current as of July 24, 2026.

1References

  1. Packet source. Matthew Gwynne and Oliver Kullmann, On SAT representations of XOR constraints, arXiv:1309.3060, definitions of AC and PC and Lemma 8.4; Emdin et al., CNF Encodings of Parity, MFCS 2022, Theorem 1.1. The lower endpoint applies Theorem 1.1(3) of Emdin et al.; the upper endpoint is reproduced by pcp5-artifact-chain-verifier; Gregory Emdin, Alexander S. Kulikov, Ivan Mihajlin, and Nikita Slezkin, CNF Encodings of Parity, MFCS 2022, Theorem 1.1(3), equation (4). ↗ open copy ↗journal article · primary source · version of record · checked 2026-07-24Source use: original summary.The certified interval is 9 to 16 clauses. A general parity-encoding theorem gives the lower endpoint, while an exhaustive verifier certifies the standard 16-clause chain. Every such encoding has at least 9 clauses. The published bound m >= 3n - 9 applies after one visible-variable polarity flip. The checked literature leaves the exact clause count open. Primary sources support the 16-clause construction and a 9-clause lower bound, with no located theorem closing the small-instance gap.Also cited at Theorem 1.1.Also cited at The lower endpoint applies Theorem 1.1(3) of Emdin et al.; the upper endpoint is reproduced by pcp5-artifact-chain-verifier.Also cited at Gregory Emdin, Alexander S. Kulikov, Ivan Mihajlin, and Nikita Slezkin, CNF Encodings of Parity, MFCS 2022, Theorem 1.1(3), equation (4).For Minimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity: The published bound m >= 3n - 9 applies after one visible-variable polarity flip.Source named by the research packet.
  2. Matthew Gwynne and Oliver Kullmann, “On SAT representations of XOR constraints”. LATA 2014: Language and Automata Theory and Applications, LNCS 8370, pages 409-420. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-04921-2_33. arXiv:1309.3060 (2013). Matthew Gwynne and Oliver Kullmann, On SAT representations of XOR constraints, arXiv:1309.3060, definitions of AC and PC and Lemma 8.4; Emdin et al., CNF Encodings of Parity, MFCS 2022, Theorem 1.1. ↗preprint · primary source · arXiv:1309.3060, version checked 2026-07-24 · checked 2026-07-24Source use: original summary.The checked literature leaves the exact clause count open. Primary sources support the 16-clause construction and a 9-clause lower bound, with no located theorem closing the small-instance gap.For Minimum propagation-complete CNF for five-bit parity: The checked literature leaves the exact clause count open. Primary sources support the 16-clause construction and a 9-clause lower bound, with no located theorem closing the small-instance gap.

Original finite minimization target with a standard 16-clause incumbent.

Discussion

Loading discussion.

Add a comment

Report comment

Flag this problem

Sign in to follow

Sign in in another tab, then return here.

Open sign-in in another tab

Report a problem

Report location:

Your ChatGPT account

Opening ChatGPT

ChatGPT is opening in a new tab.