Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Formula Simplifications as DRAT Derivations

  • Conference paper
KI 2014: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (KI 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8736))

  • 1152 Accesses

Abstract

Many real world problems are solved with satisfiability testing (SAT). However, SAT solvers have documented bugs and therefore the answer that a formula is unsatisfiable can be incorrect. Certifying algorithms are an attractive approach to increase the reliability of SAT solvers. For unsatisfiable formulas an unsatisfiability proof has to be created. This paper presents certificate constructions for various formula simplification techniques, which are crucial to the success of modern SAT solvers.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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. Arnold, H.: A linearized DPLL calculus with clause learning. Tech. rep., Universität Potsdam. Institut für Informatik (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Audemard, G., Lagniez, J.-M., Mazure, B., Saïs, L.: On freezing and reactivating learnt clauses. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds.) SAT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6695, pp. 188–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Predicting learnt clauses quality in modern SAT solvers. In: Boutilier, C. (ed.) IJCAI 2009, pp. 399–404. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Pasadena (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bacchus, F., Winter, J.: Effective preprocessing with hyper-resolution and equality reduction. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 341–355. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Beame, P., Kautz, H., Sabharwal, A.: Towards understanding and harnessing the potential of clause learning. Journal of Artificial Intelligene Research 22(1), 319–351 (2004)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E.M., Fujita, M., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking using SAT procedures instead of BDDs. In: DAC 1999, pp. 317–320 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Blum, M., Kannan, S.: Designing programs that check their work. In: Johnson, D.S. (ed.) STOC 1989, pp. 86–97. ACM (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eén, N., Biere, A.: Effective preprocessing in SAT through variable and clause elimination. In: Bacchus, F., Walsh, T. (eds.) SAT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3569, pp. 61–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Gelder, A.V.: Extracting (easily) checkable proofs from a satisfiability solver that employs both preorder and postorder resolution. In: ISAIM 2002 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goldberg, E., Novikov, Y.: Verification of proofs of unsatisfiability for CNF formulas. In: DATE 2003, pp. 10886–10891. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Großmann, P., Hölldobler, S., Manthey, N., Nachtigall, K., Opitz, J., Steinke, P.: Solving periodic event scheduling problems with SAT. In: Jiang, H., Ding, W., Ali, M., Wu, X. (eds.) IEA/AIE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7345, pp. 166–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamadi, Y., Jabbour, S., Sais, L.: Control-based clause sharing in parallel SAT solving. In: Boutilier, C. (ed.) IJCAI 2009, pp. 499–504. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Pasadena (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Han, H., Somenzi, F.: On-the-fly clause improvement. In: Kullmann, O. (ed.) SAT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5584, pp. 209–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Heule, M., Hunt Jr., W.A., Wetzler, N.: Trimming while checking clausal proofs. In: Jobstman, B., Ray, S. (eds.) FMCAD 2013, pp. 181–188. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Heule, M.J.H., Hunt Jr., W.A., Wetzler, N.: Verifying refutations with extended resolution. In: Bonacina, M.P. (ed.) CADE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7898, pp. 345–359. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Heule, M., Järvisalo, M., Biere, A.: Clause elimination procedures for CNF formulas. In: Fermüller, C.G., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR-17. LNCS, vol. 6397, pp. 357–371. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Heule, M., Järvisalo, M., Biere, A.: Covered clause elimination. In: Fermüller, C.G., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6397, pp. 41–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Heule, M.J.H., Järvisalo, M., Biere, A.: Efficient CNF simplification based on binary implication graphs. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds.) SAT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6695, pp. 201–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Hölldobler, S., Manthey, N., Philipp, T., Steinke, P.: Generic CDCL – A formalization of modern propositional satisfiability solvers. In: POS 2014 (accepted, 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Järvisalo, M., Biere, A., Heule, M.: Blocked clause elimination. In: Esparza, J., Majumdar, R. (eds.) TACAS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6015, pp. 129–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Järvisalo, M., Heule, M.J.H., Biere, A.: Inprocessing rules. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) IJCAR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7364, pp. 355–370. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaufmann, M., Kottler, S.: Beyond unit propagation in SAT solving. In: Pardalos, P.M., Rebennack, S. (eds.) SEA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6630, pp. 267–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Kautz, H., Selman, B.: Planning as satisfiability. In: Neumann, B. (ed.) ECAI 1992, pp. 359–363. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kullmann, O.: On a generalization of extended resolution. Discrete Applied Mathematics 96-97, 149–176 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Li, C.M.: Integrating equivalency reasoning into davis-putnam procedure. In: Kautz, H.A., Porter, B.W. (eds.) IAAI 2000, pp. 291–296. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lynce, I., Marques-Silva, J.: Efficient haplotype inference with Boolean satisfiability. In: AAAI 2006, pp. 104–109. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lynce, I., Marques-Silva, J.P.: Probing-based preprocessing techniques for propositional satisfiability. In: ICTAI 2003, pp. 105–110. IEEE Computer Society, Sacramento (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Manthey, N., Heule, M.J.H., Biere, A.: Automated reencoding of Boolean formulas. In: Biere, A., Nahir, A., Vos, T. (eds.) HVC. LNCS, vol. 7857, pp. 102–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Manthey, N., Philipp, T., Wernhard, C.: Soundness of inprocessing in clause sharing SAT solvers. In: Järvisalo, M., Van Gelder, A. (eds.) SAT 2013. LNCS, vol. 7962, pp. 22–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Marić, F.: Formalization and implementation of modern SAT solvers. Journal of Automated Reasoning 43(1), 81–119 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. McConnell, R.M., Mehlhorn, K., Näher, S., Schweitzer, P.: Certifying algorithms. Computer Science Review 5(2), 119–161 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Abstract DPLL and abstract DPLL modulo theories. In: Baader, F., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3452, pp. 36–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Piette, C., Hamadi, Y., Sais, L.: Vivifying propositional clausal formulae. In: Ghallab, M., Spyropoulos, C.D., Fakotakis, N., Avouris, N.M. (eds.) ECAI 2008, pp. 525–529. IOS Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rintanen, J.: Engineering efficient planners with SAT. In: Raedt, L.D., Bessière, C., Dubois, D., Doherty, P., Frasconi, P., Heintz, F., Lucas, P.J.F. (eds.) ECAI 2012. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 242, pp. 684–689. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Subbarayan, S., Pradhan, D.K.: NiVER: Non-increasing variable elimination resolution for preprocessing SAT instances. In: Hoos, H.H., Mitchell, D.G. (eds.) SAT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3542, pp. 276–291. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Tseitin, G.S.: On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. In: Siekmann, J.H., Wrightson, G. (eds.) Automation of Reasoning. Symbolic Computation, pp. 466–483. Springer, Heidelberg (1983)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Wetzler, N., Heule, M.J.H., Hunt Jr., W.A.: Mechanical verification of SAT refutations with extended resolution. In: Blazy, S., Paulin-Mohring, C., Pichardie, D. (eds.) ITP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7998, pp. 229–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Group, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062, Dresden, Germany

    Norbert Manthey & Tobias Philipp

Authors
  1. Norbert Manthey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tobias Philipp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Bremen, Germany

    Carsten Lutz

  2. University of New South Wales, 2052, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Michael Thielscher

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Manthey, N., Philipp, T. (2014). Formula Simplifications as DRAT Derivations. In: Lutz, C., Thielscher, M. (eds) KI 2014: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. KI 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8736. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11206-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11206-0_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11205-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11206-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation