  Learning pseudo-Boolean (PB) constraints in PB solvers exploiting cutting
planes based inference is not as well understood as clause learning in
conflict-driven clause learning solvers. In this paper, we show that PB
constraints derived using cutting planes may contain \emph{irrelevant
literals}, i.e., literals whose assigned values (whatever they are) never
change the truth value of the constraint. Such literals may lead to infer
constraints that are weaker than they should be, impacting the size of the
proof built by the solver, and thus also affecting its performance. This
suggests that current implementations of PB solvers based on cutting planes
should be reconsidered to prevent the generation of irrelevant literals.
Indeed, detecting and removing irrelevant literals is too expensive in practice
to be considered as an option (the associated problem is NP-hard.
