Multiple Preprocessing for Systematic SAT Solvers
Abstract
High-performance SAT solvers based on systematic search generally use either conflict driven clause learning (CDCL) or lookahead techniques to gain efficiency. Both styles of reasoning can gain from a preprocessing phase in which some form of deduction is used to simplify the problem. In this paper we undertake an empirical examination of the effects of several recently proposed preprocessors on both CDCL and lookahead-based SAT solvers. One finding is that the use of multiple preprocessors one after the other can be much more effective than using any one of them alone, but that the order in which they are applied is significant. We intend our results to be particularly useful to those implementing new preprocessors and solvers.
References (28)
- Fadi A. Aloul, Igor L. Markov, and Karem A. Sakallah. Shatter: Effi- cient symmetry-breaking for boolean satisfiability. In Design Automation Conference, pages 836-839. ACM/IEEE, 2003.
- Anbulagan, Duc Nghia Pham, John Slaney, and Abdul Sattar. Old reso- lution meets modern SLS. In Proceedings of 20th AAAI, pages 354-359, 2005.
- Anbulagan, Duc Nghia Pham, John Slaney, and Abdul Sattar. Boosting SLS performance by incorporating resolution-based preprocessor. In Pro- ceedings of Third International Workshop on Local Search Techniques in Constraint Satisfaction (LSCS), in conjunction with CP-06, pages 43-57, 2006.
- Anbulagan and John Slaney. Lookahead saturation with restriction for SAT. In Proceedings of 11th CP, pages 727-731, 2005.
- Fadi A. Aloul, Karem A. Sakallah, and Igor L. Markov. Efficient symmetry breaking for boolean satisfiability. In Proceedings of 18th IJCAI, Mexico, 2003.
- Fahiem Bacchus. Enhancing Davis Putnam with extended binary clause rea- soning. In Proceedings of 18th AAAI, pages 613-619, Edmonton, Canada, August 2002. AAAI Press.
- Ronen I. Brafman. A simplifier for propositional formulas with many binary clauses. In Proceedings of 17th IJCAI, pages 515-522, 2001.
- Ronen I. Brafman. A simplifier for propositional formulas with many binary clauses. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B, 34(1):52-59, 2004.
- Fahiem Bacchus and Jonathan Winter. Effective preprocessing with hyper- resolution and equality reduction. In Revised Selected Papers of SAT 2003, LNCS 2919 Springer, pages 341-355, 2004.
- Olivier Dubois and Gilles Dequen. A backbone-search heuristic for efficient solving of hard 3-SAT formulae. In Proceedings of 17th IJCAI, pages 248- 253, Seattle, Washington, USA, 2001.
- M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. Journal of the ACM, 7:201-215, 1960.
- Niklas Eén and Armin Biere. Effective preprocessing in SAT through vari- able and clause elimination. In Proceedings of 8th SAT, LNCS Springer, 2005.
- Niklas Eén and Niklas Sorensson. An extensible SAT-solver. In Proceedings of 6th SAT, 2003.
- Marijn Heule and Hans van Maaren. Aligning CNF-and equivalence- reasoning. In Proceedings of 7th SAT, Vancouver, Canada, 2004.
- Marijn Heule and Hans van Maaren. March dl: Adding adaptive heuristics and a new branching strategy. Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation, (2):47-59, 2006.
- Chu Min Li and Anbulagan. Look-ahead versus look-back for satisfiability problems. In Proceedings of 3rd CP, pages 341-355, Schloss Hagenberg, Austria, 1997.
- Chu Min Li. Integrating equivalency reasoning into Davis-Putnam pro- cedure. In Proceedings of 17th AAAI, pages 291-296, USA, 2000. AAAI Press.
- I. Lynce and J. Marques-Silva. The interaction between simplification and search in propositional satisfiability. In Proceedings of CP'01 Workshop on Modeling and Problem Formulation, 2001.
- MMZ + 01] M. W. Moskewicz, C. F. Madigan, Y. Zhao, L. Zhang, and S. Malik. Chaff: Engineering an efficient SAT solver. In Proceedings of DAC, pages 530-535, 2001.
- Richard Ostrowski, Éric Grégoire, Bertrand Mazure, and Lakhdar Sais. Recovering and exploiting structural knowledge from CNF formulas. In Proceedings of 8th CP, pages 185-199, 2002.
- W. V. Quine. A way to simplify truth functions. American Mathematical Monthly, 62:627-631, 1955.
- J. A. Robinson. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. Journal of the ACM, 12:23-41, 1965.
- Lawrence O. Ryan. Efficient Algorithms for Clause Learning SAT Solvers. PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada, 2004.
- Niklas Sorensson and Niklas Eén. MINISAT v1.13 -A SAT solver with conflict-clause minimization. In 2005 International SAT Competition website: http://www.lri.fr/∼simon/contest05/results/descriptions/solvers/minisat static.pdf, 2005.
- Bart Selman, Henry Kautz, and David McAllester. Ten challenges in propo- sitional reasoning and search. In Proceedings of 15th IJCAI, pages 50-54, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan, 1997.
- Sathiamoorthy Subbarayan and Dhiraj K. Pradhan. NiVER: Non increasing variable elimination resolution for preprocessing SAT instances. In Revised Selected Papers of SAT 2004, LNCS 3542 Springer, pages 276-291, 2005.
- Joost P. Warners and Hans van Maaren. A two-phase algorithm for solving a class of hard satisfiability problems. Operations Research Letters, 23:81- 88, 1998.
- L. Zhang, C. F. Madigan, M. W. Moskewicz, and S. Malik. Efficient con- flict driven learning in a Boolean satisfiability solver. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided Design ICCAD2001, 2001.