Skip to main content

Using Boolean Constraint Propagation for Sub-clauses Deduction

  • Conference paper
Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming - CP 2005 (CP 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 3709))

Abstract

The Boolean Constraint Propagation (BCP) is a well-known helpful technique implemented in most state-of-the-art efficient satisfiability solvers. We propose in this paper a new use of the BCP to deduce sub-clauses from the associated implication graph. Our aim is to reduce the length of clauses thanks to the subsumption rule. We show how such extension can be grafted to modern SAT solvers and we provide some experimental results of the sub-clauses deduction as a pretreatment process.

This work is supported by the Region Picardie under HTSC project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Kautz, H.A., Selman, B.: Planning as Satisfiability. In: Proc. of ECAI 1992, Vienna, Austria, pp. 359–363 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Marques-Silva, J.P., Sakallah, K.A.: Boolean Satisfiability in Electronic Design Automation. In: Proc. of DAC 2000, Los Angeles, USA, pp. 675–680 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Biere, A., Clarke, E., Raimi, R., Zhu, Y.: Verifying Safety Properties of a PowerPC Microprocessor Using Symbolic Model Checking without BDDs. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 60–72. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams, R., Gomes, C., Selman, B.: Backdoors To Typical Case Complexity. In: IJCAI 2003, Acapulco, Mexico, pp. 1173–1178 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Li, C.M.: Equivalency reasoning to solve a class of hard sat problems. Information Processing Letters 76, 75–81 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A Machine Program for Theorem Proving. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 5, 394–397 (1962)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang, L., Madigan, C.F., Moskewicz, M.W., Malik, S.: Efficient Conflict Driven Learning in a Boolean Satisfiability Solver. In: Proc. of ICCAD 2001, San Jose, CA, USA, pp. 279–285 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Darras, S., Dequen, G., Devendeville, L., Mazure, B., Ostrowski, R., Saïs, L. (2005). Using Boolean Constraint Propagation for Sub-clauses Deduction. In: van Beek, P. (eds) Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming - CP 2005. CP 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3709. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11564751_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11564751_59

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29238-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32050-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics