The Quine–McCluskey algorithm is functionally identical to
Karnaugh mapping, but the tabular form makes it more efficient for use in computer algorithms, and it also gives a deterministic way to check that the minimal form of a Boolean function has been reached. It is sometimes referred to as the tabulation method.
Use those prime implicants in a prime implicant chart to find the essential prime implicants of the function, as well as other prime implicants that are necessary to cover the function.
Complexity
Although more practical than
Karnaugh mapping when dealing with more than four variables, the Quine–McCluskey algorithm also has a limited range of use since the
problem it solves is
NP-complete.[22][23][24] The
running time of the Quine–McCluskey algorithm grows
exponentially with the number of variables. For a function of n variables the number of prime implicants can be as large as ,[25] e.g. for 32 variables there may be over 534 × 1012 prime implicants. Functions with a large number of variables have to be minimized with potentially non-optimal
heuristic methods, of which the
Espresso heuristic logic minimizer was the de facto standard in 1995.[needs update][26] For one natural class of functions , the precise complexity of finding all prime implicants is better-understood: Milan Mossé, Harry Sha, and Li-Yang Tan discovered a near-optimal algorithm for finding all prime implicants of a formula in
conjunctive normal form.[27]
Step two of the algorithm amounts to solving the
set cover problem;[28]NP-hard instances of this problem may occur in this algorithm step.[29][30]
Example
Input
In this example, the input is a Boolean function in four variables, which evaluates to on the values and , evaluates to an unknown value on and , and to everywhere else (where these integers are interpreted in their binary form for input to for succinctness of notation). The inputs that evaluate to are called 'minterms'. We encode all of this information by writing
This expression says that the output function f will be 1 for the minterms and (denoted by the 'm' term) and that we don't care about the output for and combinations (denoted by the 'd' term). The summation symbol denotes the logical sum (logical OR, or disjunction) of all the terms being summed over.
Step 1: finding prime implicants
First, we write the function as a table (where 'x' stands for don't care):
A
B
C
D
f
m0
0
0
0
0
0
m1
0
0
0
1
0
m2
0
0
1
0
0
m3
0
0
1
1
0
m4
0
1
0
0
1
m5
0
1
0
1
0
m6
0
1
1
0
0
m7
0
1
1
1
0
m8
1
0
0
0
1
m9
1
0
0
1
x
m10
1
0
1
0
1
m11
1
0
1
1
1
m12
1
1
0
0
1
m13
1
1
0
1
0
m14
1
1
1
0
x
m15
1
1
1
1
1
One can easily form the canonical
sum of products expression from this table, simply by summing the
minterms (leaving out
don't-care terms) where the function evaluates to one:
which is not minimal. So to optimize, all minterms that evaluate to one are first placed in a minterm table. Don't-care terms are also added into this table (names in parentheses), so they can be combined with minterms:
Number of 1s
Minterm
Binary Representation
1
m4
0100
m8
1000
2
(m9)
1001
m10
1010
m12
1100
3
m11
1011
(m14)
1110
4
m15
1111
At this point, one can start combining minterms with other minterms in adjacent groups. If two terms differ by only a single digit, that digit can be replaced with a dash indicating that the digit doesn't matter. Terms that can't be combined any more are marked with an asterisk (*). For instance 1000 and 1001 can be combined to give 100-, indicating that both minterms imply the first digit is 1 and the next two are 0.
Number of 1s
Minterm
0-Cube
Size 2 Implicants
1
m4
0100
m(4,12)
-100 *
m8
1000
m(8,9)
100-
—
m(8,10)
10-0
—
m(8,12)
1-00
2
m9
1001
m(9,11)
10-1
m10
1010
m(10,11)
101-
—
m(10,14)
1-10
m12
1100
m(12,14)
11-0
3
m11
1011
m(11,15)
1-11
m14
1110
m(14,15)
111-
4
m15
1111
—
When going from Size 2 to Size 4, treat - as a third bit value. Match up the -'s first. The terms represent products and to combine two product terms they must have the same variables. One of the variables should be complemented in one term and uncomplemented in the other. The remaining variables present should agree. So to match two terms the -'s must align and all but one of the other digits must be the same. For instance, -110 and -100 can be combined to give -1-0, as can -110 and -010 to give --10, but -110 and 011- cannot since the -'s do not align. -110 corresponds to BCD' while
011- corresponds to A'BC, and BCD' + A'BC is not equivalent to a product term.
Number of 1s
Minterm
0-Cube
Size 2 Implicants
Size 4 Implicants
1
m4
0100
m(4,12)
-100 *
—
m8
1000
m(8,9)
100-
m(8,9,10,11)
10-- *
—
m(8,10)
10-0
m(8,10,12,14)
1--0 *
—
m(8,12)
1-00
—
2
m9
1001
m(9,11)
10-1
—
m10
1010
m(10,11)
101-
m(10,11,14,15)
1-1- *
—
m(10,14)
1-10
—
m12
1100
m(12,14)
11-0
—
3
m11
1011
m(11,15)
1-11
—
m14
1110
m(14,15)
111-
—
4
m15
1111
—
—
Note: In this example, none of the terms in the size 4 implicants table can be combined any further. In general this process should be continued (sizes 8, 16 etc.) until no more terms can be combined.
Step 2: prime implicant chart
None of the terms can be combined any further than this, so at this point we construct an essential prime implicant table. Along the side goes the prime implicants that have just been generated (these are the ones that have been marked with a "*" in the previous step), and along the top go the minterms specified earlier. The don't care terms are not placed on top—they are omitted from this section because they are not necessary inputs.
4
8
10
11
12
15
⇒
A
B
C
D
m(4,12) #
⇒
—
1
0
0
m(8,9,10,11)
⇒
1
0
—
—
m(8,10,12,14)
⇒
1
—
—
0
m(10,11,14,15) #
⇒
1
—
1
—
To find the essential prime implicants, we look for columns with only one "✓". If a column has only one "✓", this means that the minterm can only be covered by one prime implicant. This prime implicant is essential.
For example: in the first column, with minterm 4, there is only one "✓". This means that m(4,12) is essential (hence marked by #). Minterm 15 also has only one "✓", so m(10,11,14,15) is also essential. Now all columns with one "✓" are covered. The rows with minterm m(4,12) and m(10,11,14,15) can now be removed, together with all the columns they cover.
The second prime implicant can be 'covered' by the third and fourth, and the third prime implicant can be 'covered' by the second and first, and neither is thus essential. If a prime implicant is essential then, as would be expected, it is necessary to include it in the minimized boolean equation. In some cases, the essential prime implicants do not cover all minterms, in which case additional procedures for chart reduction can be employed. The simplest "additional procedure" is trial and error, but a more systematic way is
Petrick's method. In the current example, the essential prime implicants do not handle all of the minterms, so, in this case, the essential implicants can be combined with one of the two non-essential ones to yield one equation:
^Ladd, Christine (1883). "On the algebra of logic". In
Peirce, Charles Sanders (ed.). Studies in Logic. Boston, USA:
Little, Brown & Company. pp. 17–71. p. 23: [...] If the reduction [of an expression to simplest form] is not evident, it may be facilitated by taking the negative of the expression, reducing it, and then restoring it to the positive form. [...]
^Samson, Edward Walter; Mills, Burton E. (April 1954). Circuit Minimization: Algebra and Algorithms for New Boolean Canonical Expressions. Bedford, Massachusetts, USA:
Air Force Cambridge Research Center. Technical Report AFCRC TR 54-21.
^Mullin, Albert Alkins; Kellner, Wayne G. (1958). Written at University of Illinois, Urbana, USA and Electrical Engineering Department,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, USA.
"A Residue Test for Boolean Functions"(PDF). Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science (Teaching memorandum). 51 (3–4). Springfield, Illinois, USA: 14–19.
S2CID125171479.
Archived(PDF) from the original on 2020-05-05. Retrieved 2020-05-05.
[1] (6 pages) (NB. In
his book, Caldwell dates this to November 1955 as a teaching memorandum. Since Mullin dates their work to 1958 in
another work and Abrahams/Nordahl's
class memorandum is also dated November 1955, this could be a copy error.)
^
abCaldwell, Samuel Hawks (1958-12-01) [February 1958]. "5.8. Operations Using Decimal Symbols". Written at Watertown, Massachusetts, USA. Switching Circuits and Logical Design. 5th printing September 1963 (1st ed.). New York, USA:
John Wiley & Sons Inc. pp. 162–169.
ISBN0-47112969-0.
LCCN58-7896. p. 166: [...] It is a pleasure to record that this treatment is based on the work of two students during the period they were studying Switching Circuits at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They discussed the method independently and then collaborated in preparing a class memorandum:
P. W. Abraham and J. G. Nordahl [...] (xviii+686 pages) (NB. For the first major treatise of the decimal method in this book, it is sometimes misleadingly known as "Caldwell's decimal tabulation".)
^
abMullin, Albert Alkins (1960-03-15) [1959-09-19]. Written at University of Illinois, Urbana, USA. Fisher, Harvey I.; Ekblaw, George E.; Green, F. O.; Jones, Reece; Kruidenier, Francis; McGregor, John; Silva, Paul; Thompson, Milton (eds.).
"Two Applications of Elementary Number Theory"(PDF). Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science. 52 (3–4). Springfield, Illinois, USA: 102–103.
Archived(PDF) from the original on 2020-05-05. Retrieved 2020-05-05.
[2][3][4] (2 pages)
^
abMcCluskey, Edward Joseph Jr. (June 1960). "Albert A. Mullin and Wayne G. Kellner. A residue test for Boolean functions. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science, vol. 51 nos. 3 and 4, (1958), pp. 14–19". The Journal of Symbolic Logic (Review). 25 (2): 185.
doi:
10.2307/2964263.
JSTOR2964263.
S2CID123530443. p. 185: [...] The results of this paper are presented in the more readily available
book by S. H. Caldwell [...]. In this book, the author gives credit to
Mullin and Kellner for development of the manipulations with the decimal numbers. (1 page)
^Kämmerer, Wilhelm[in German] (May 1969). "I.12. Theorie: Minimierung Boolescher Funktionen". Written at Jena, Germany. In
Frühauf, Hans[in German]; Kämmerer, Wilhelm; Schröder, Kurz; Winkler, Helmut (eds.).
Digitale Automaten – Theorie, Struktur, Technik, Programmieren. Elektronisches Rechnen und Regeln (in German). Vol. 5 (1 ed.). Berlin, Germany:
Akademie-Verlag GmbH. pp. 98, 103–104. License no. 202-100/416/69. Order no. 4666 ES 20 K 3. p. 98: [...] 1955 wurde das Verfahren auf die bequemere dezimale Schreibweise umgestellt (
P. W. Abraham und I. G. Nordahl in [
Caldwell]). [...] (NB. A second edition 1973 exists as well.)
^Majumder, Alak; Chowdhury, Barnali; Mondal, Abir J.; Jain, Kunj (2015-01-30) [2015-01-09].
Investigation on Quine McCluskey Method: A Decimal Manipulation Based Novel Approach for the Minimization of Boolean Function. 2015 International Conference on Electronic Design, Computer Networks & Automated Verification (EDCAV), Shillong, India (Conference paper). Department of Electronics & Communication, Engineering National Institute of Technology, Arunachal Pradesh Yupia, India. pp. 18–22.
doi:
10.1109/EDCAV.2015.7060531.
Archived from the original on 2020-05-08. Retrieved 2020-05-08.
[6] (NB. This work does not cite the prior art on decimal methods.) (5 pages)
^Masek, William J. (1979). Some NP-complete set covering problems. unpublished.
^Czort, Sebastian Lukas Arne (1999). The complexity of minimizing disjunctive normal form formulas (Master's thesis). University of Aarhus.
Curtis, Herbert Allen (1962). "Chapter 2.3. McCluskey's Method". A new approach to the design of switching circuits. The Bell Laboratories Series (1 ed.). Princeton, New Jersey, USA:
D. van Nostrand Company, Inc. pp. 90–160.
ISBN0-44201794-4.
OCLC1036797958.
S2CID57068910.
ISBN978-0-44201794-1. ark:/13960/t56d6st0q. (viii+635 pages) (NB. This book was reprinted by Chin Jih in 1969.)