Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing

SAT 2011: Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing - SAT 2011 pp 230–244Cite as

Abstraction-Based Algorithm for 2QBF

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 6695))

Abstract

Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBFs) enable standard representation of PSPACE problems. In particular, formulas with two quantifier levels (2QBFs) enable representing problems in the second level of the polynomial hierarchy (Π2 P, Σ2 P). This paper proposes an algorithm for solving 2QBF satisfiability by counterexample guided abstraction refinement (CEGAR). This represents an alternative approach to 2QBF satisfiability and, by extension, to solving decision problems in the second level of polynomial hierarchy. In addition, the paper presents a comparison of a prototype implementing the presented algorithm to state of the art QBF solvers, showing that a larger set of instances is solved.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barrett, C.W., Dill, D.L., Stump, A.: Checking satisfiability of first-order formulas by incremental translation to SAT. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 236–249. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Biere, A., Heule, M., van Maaren, H., Walsh, T. (eds.): Handbook of Satisfiability, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 185. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Browning, B., Remshagen, A.: A SAT-based solver for Q-ALL SAT. In: Menezes, R. (ed.) ACM Southeast Regional Conference, pp. 30–33. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Castellini, C., Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A.: Improvements to SAT-based conformant planning. In: European Conference on Planning (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chauhan, P., Clarke, E.M., Kukula, J.H., Sapra, S., Veith, H., Wang, D.: Automated abstraction refinement for model checking large state spaces using SAT based conflict analysis. In: Aagaard, M.D., O’Leary, J.W. (eds.) FMCAD 2002. LNCS, vol. 2517, pp. 33–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking. J. ACM 50(5), 752–794 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Clarke, E.M., Gupta, A., Strichman, O.: SAT-based counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. IEEE Trans. on CAD of Integrated Circuits and Systems 23(7), 1113–1123 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dershowitz, N., Hanna, Z., Katz, J.: Bounded model checking with QBF. In: Bacchus, F., Walsh, T. (eds.) SAT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3569, pp. 408–414. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) [18]

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: Propositional circumscription and extended closed-world reasoning are ΠP 2-complete. Theor. Comput. Sci. 114(2), 231–245 (1993)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Flanagan, C., Joshi, R., Ou, X., Saxe, J.B.: Theorem proving using lazy proof explication. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 355–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Giunchiglia, E., Marin, P., Narizzano, M.: An effective preprocessor for QBF pre-reasoning. In: 2nd International Workshop on Quantification in Constraint Programming, QiCP (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Giunchiglia, E., Marin, P., Narizzano, M.: Reasoning with quantified boolean formulas. In: Biere, et al (eds.) [2], pp. 761–780

    Google Scholar 

  15. Giunchiglia, E., Marin, P., Narizzano, M.: sQueezeBF: An effective preprocessor for QBFs based on equivalence reasoning. In: Strichman, O., Szeider, A. (eds.) [36], pp. 85–98

    Google Scholar 

  16. Giunchiglia, E., Narizzano, M., Tacchella, A.: QuBE++: An Efficient QBF Solver. In: Hu, A.J., Martin, A.K. (eds.) FMCAD 2004. LNCS, vol. 3312, pp. 201–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Giunchiglia, E., Narizzano, M., Tacchella, A.: Clause/term resolution and learning in the evaluation of quantified boolean formulas. J. Artif. Intell. Res (JAIR) 26, 371–416 (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.): SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Janota, M., Botterweck, G., Grigore, R., Marques-Silva, J.: How to complete an interactive configuration process? In: van Leeuwen, J., Muscholl, A., Peleg, D., Pokorný, J., Rumpe, B. (eds.) SOFSEM 2010. LNCS, vol. 5901, pp. 528–539. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Janota, M., Grigore, R., Marques-Silva, J.: Counterexample guided abstraction refinement algorithm for propositional circumscription. In: Janhunen, T., Niemelä, I. (eds.) JELIA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6341, pp. 195–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Kleine-Büning, H., Bubeck, U.: Theory of quantified boolean formulas. In: Biere, et al (eds.) [2]

    Google Scholar 

  22. Li, C.M., Manyà, F.: Maxsat, hard and soft constraints. In: Biere, et al (eds.) [2], pp. 613–631

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marques-Silva, J., Lynce, I., Malik, S.: Conflict-driven clause learning SAT solvers. In: Biere, et al (eds.) [2], pp. 131–153

    Google Scholar 

  24. Meyer, A.R., Stockmeyer, L.J.: The equivalence problem for regular expressions with squaring requires exponential space. In: Symposium Switching and Automata Theory (October 1972)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mneimneh, M.N., Sakallah, K.A.: Computing vertex eccentricity in exponentially large graphs: QBF formulation and solution. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) [18], pp. 411–425

    Google Scholar 

  26. Monniaux, D.: Quantifier elimination by lazy model enumeration. In: Touili, T., Cook, B., Jackson, P. (eds.) CAV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6174, pp. 585–599. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. de Moura, L.M., Rueß, H., Sorea, M.: Lazy theorem proving for bounded model checking over infinite domains. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) CADE 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2392, pp. 438–455. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Peschiera, C., Pulina, L., Tacchella, A., Bubeck, U., Kullmann, O., Lynce, I.: The seventh QBF solvers evaluation (QBFEVAL’10). In: Strichman, O., Szeider, S. (eds.) [36], pp. 237–250

    Google Scholar 

  29. Plaisted, D.A., Biere, A., Zhu, Y.: A satisfiability procedure for quantified boolean formulae. Discrete Applied Mathematics 130(2), 291–328 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Plaisted, D.A., Greenbaum, S.: A structure-preserving clause form translation. J. Symb. Comput. 2(3), 293–304 (1986)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. QBF solver evaluation portal, http://www.qbflib.org/index_eval.php

  32. The Quantified Boolean Formulas satisfiability library, http://www.qbflib.org/

  33. Ranjan, D.P., Tang, D., Malik, S.: A comparative study of 2QBF algorithms. In: SAT (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rintanen, J.: Improvements to the evaluation of quantified Boolean formulae. In: Dean, T. (ed.) IJCAI, pp. 1192–1197. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rosa, E.D., Giunchiglia, E., Maratea, M.: Solving satisfiability problems with preferences. Constraints 15(4), 485–515 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Strichman, O., Szeider, S. (eds.): SAT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6175. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. STRUQS: A Structural QBF Solver, www.qbflib.org/DESCRIPTIONS/struqs.pdf

  38. Tseitin, G.S.: On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. Studies in Constructive Mathematics and Mathematical Logic 2(115-125), 10–13 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Umans, C.: The minimum equivalent DNF problem and shortest implicants. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 63(4), 597–611 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Wintersteiger, C.M., Hamadi, Y., de Moura, L.: Efficiently solving quantified bit-vector formulas. In: Proceedings of Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design FMCAD (October 2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University College Dublin, Ireland

    Joao Marques-Silva

  2. INESC-ID, Lisbon, Portugal

    Mikoláš Janota & Joao Marques-Silva

Authors
  1. Mikoláš Janota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joao Marques-Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Michigan, 48109, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Karem A. Sakallah

  2. LRI / CNRS UMR8623 / INRIA Saclay, Univ Paris-Sud, F-91405, Orsay, France

    Laurent Simon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Janota, M., Marques-Silva, J. (2011). Abstraction-Based Algorithm for 2QBF. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds) Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing - SAT 2011. SAT 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6695. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21581-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21581-0_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21580-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21581-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation