Abstract
Boolean Satisfiability (SAT) solvers are now routinely used in the verification of large industrial problems. However, their application in safety-critical domains such as the railways, avionics, and automotive industries requires some form of assurance for the results, as the solvers can (and sometimes do) have bugs. Unfortunately, the complexity of modern and highly optimized SAT solvers renders impractical the development of direct formal proofs of their correctness. This paper presents an alternative approach where an untrusted, industrial-strength, SAT solver is plugged into a trusted, formally verified, SAT proof checker to provide industrial-strength certified SAT solving. The key characteristics of our approach are (i) that the checker is not tied to a specific SAT solver but certifies any solver respecting the agreed format for satisfiability and unsatisfiability claims, (ii) that the checker is automatically extracted from the formal development, and (iii) that the combined system can be used as a standalone executable program independent of any supporting theorem prover. The core of the system is a checker for unsatisfiability claims that is formally designed and verified in Coq. We present its formal design and outline the correctness criteria. The actual standalone checker is automatically extracted from the the Coq development. An evaluation of the checker on a representative set of industrial benchmarks from the SAT Race Competition shows that, albeit it is slower than uncertified SAT checkers, it is significantly faster than certified checkers implemented on top of an interactive theorem prover.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Angelo, C.M., Claesen, L., De Man, H.: Degrees of formality in shallow embedding hardware description languages in HOL. In: Joyce, J.J., Seger, C.-J.H. (eds.) HUG 1993. LNCS, vol. 780, pp. 89–100. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)
Beame, P., Kautz, H.A., Sabharwal, A.: Towards understanding and harnessing the potential of clause learning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 22, 319–351 (2004)
Bertot, Y., Castéran, P.: Interactive theorem proving and program development. Coq’Art: The calculus of inductive constructions (2004)
Biere, A.: PicoSAT essentials. J. Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation 4, 75–97 (2008)
Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Strichman, O., Zhu, Y.: Bounded Model Checking. In: Advances in Computers. Academic Press, London (2003)
Bulwahn, L., Krauss, A., Haftmann, F., Erkök, L., Matthews, J.: Imperative functional programming with Isabelle/HOL. In: Mohamed, O.A., Muñoz, C., Tahar, S. (eds.) TPHOLs 2008. LNCS, vol. 5170, pp. 134–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Coquand, T., Huet, G.: The Calculus of Constructions. Inf. Comput. 76(2-3), 95–120 (1988)
Coquand, T., Paulin, C.: Inductively defined types. In: Martin-Löf, P., Mints, G. (eds.) COLOG 1988. LNCS, vol. 417, pp. 50–66. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)
Een, N., Sorensson, N.: An extensible sat-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Goldberg, E.I., Novikov, Y.: Verification of proofs of unsatisfiability for CNF formulas. In: Proc. Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 10886–10891. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2003)
Hammarberg, J., Nadjm-Tehrani, S.: Formal verification of fault tolerance in safety-critical reconfigurable modules. J. Software Tools for Technology Transfer 7(3), 268–279 (2005)
Leroy, X., Blazy, S.: Formal Verification of a C-like Memory Model and its uses for Verifying Program Transformations. J. Automated Reasoning 41(1), 1–31 (2008)
Lescuyer, S., Conchon, S.: A reflexive formalization of a SAT solver in Coq. In: Proc. Emerging Trends of TPHOLs (2008)
Marić, F.: Formalization and implementation of modern SAT solvers. J. Automated Reasoning 43(1), 81–119 (2009)
Moskal, M.: Rocket-fast proof checking for SMT solvers. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 486–500. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Penicka, M.: Formal approach to railway applications. In: Jones, C.B., Liu, Z., Woodcock, J. (eds.) Formal Methods and Hybrid Real-Time Systems. LNCS, vol. 4700, pp. 504–520. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Boulton, R., Gordon, A., Gordon, M.J.C., Herbert, J., van Tassel, J.: Experience with embedding hardware description languages in HOL. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Theorem Provers in Circuit Design: Theory, Practice and Experience, pp. 129–156. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1992)
Robinson, J.A.: A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle. J. ACM 12(1), 23–41 (1965)
Russell, S.J., Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2003)
SAT 2007 Competition (2007), http://www.cril.univ-artois.fr/SAT07/results/globalbysolver.php?idev=11&det=1
SAT 2007 Competition - Phase 2 (2007), http://users.soe.ucsc.edu/~avg/ProofChecker/cert-poster-sat07.pdf
Scott, D.S.: A type-theoretical alternative to ISWIM, CUCH, OWHY. Theor. Comput. Sci. 121(1-2), 411–440 (1993)
Shankar, N.: Trust and Automation in Verification Tools. In: Cha, S(S.), Choi, J.-Y., Kim, M., Lee, I., Viswanathan, M. (eds.) ATVA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5311, pp. 4–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Smith, D.R., Westfold, S.J.: Synthesis of propositional satisfiability solvers. Technical report, Kestrel Institute (April 2008)
Van Gelder, A.: Verifying propositional unsatisfiability: Pitfalls to avoid. In: Marques-Silva, J., Sakallah, K.A. (eds.) SAT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4501, pp. 328–333. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Weber, T.: Efficiently checking propositional resolution proofs in Isabelle/HOL. In: 6th Intl. Workshop Implementation of Logics, Phnom Penh 2006 (2006)
Weber, T., Amjad, H.: Private communication
Weber, T., Amjad, H.: Efficiently checking propositional refutations in HOL theorem provers. J. Applied Logic 7(1), 26–40 (2009)
Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Validating SAT solvers using an independent resolution-based checker: Practical implementations and other applications. In: Proc. Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 10880–10885. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Darbari, A., Fischer, B., Marques-Silva, J. (2010). Industrial-Strength Certified SAT Solving through Verified SAT Proof Checking. In: Cavalcanti, A., Deharbe, D., Gaudel, MC., Woodcock, J. (eds) Theoretical Aspects of Computing – ICTAC 2010. ICTAC 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6255. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14808-8_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14808-8_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-14807-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-14808-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)