Article

Dependent and Independent Variables in Propositional Satisfiability

Authors:

Enrico Giunchiglia,

Armando TacchellaAuthors Info & Claims

JELIA '02: Proceedings of the European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence

Pages 296 - 307

Published: 23 September 2002 Publication History

Abstract

Propositional reasoning (SAT) is central in many applications of Computer Science. Several decision procedures for SAT have been proposed, along with optimizations and heuristics to speed them up. Currently, the most effective implementations are based on the Davis, Logemann, Loveland method. In this method, the input formula is represented as a set of clauses, and the space of truth assignments is searched by iteratively assigning a literal until all the clauses are satisfied, or a clause is violated and backtracking occurs. Once a new literal is assigned, pruning techniques (e.g., unit propagation) are used to cut the search space by inferring truth values for other variables.In this paper, we investigate the "independent variable selection (IVS) heuristic", i.e., given a formula on the set of variables N , the selection is restricted to a - possibly small - subset S which is sufficient to determine a truth value for all the variables in N . During the search phase, scoring and selection of the literal to assign next are restricted to S , and the truth values for the remaining variables are determined by the pruning techniques of the solver. We discuss the possible advantages and disadvantages of the IVS heuristic. Our experimental analysis shows that obtaining either positive or negative results strictly depends on the type of problems considered, on the underlying scoring and selection technique, and also on the backtracking scheme.

References

[1]

A. Biere, A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, and Y. Zhu. Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS '99) , 1999.

[2]

M. Buro and H. Buning. Report on a SAT competition. Technical Report 110, University of Paderborn, Germany, November 1992.

[3]

A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, E. Giunchiglia, F. Giunchiglia, M. Pistore, M. Roveri, R. Sebastiani, and A. Tacchella. NuSMV 2: An opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In Proc. CAV , 2002. To appear.

[4]

A. Cimatti, E. Giunchiglia, M. Pistore, M. Roveri, R. Sebastiani, and A. Tacchella. Integrating BDD-based and SAT-based symbolic model checking. In A. Armando, editor, Proceedings of the 4rd International Workshop on Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS 2002) , volume 2309 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science , pages 49-56. Springer-Verlag, 2002.

[5]

Fady Copty, Limor Fix, Enrico Giunchiglia, Gila Kamhi, Armando Tacchella, and Moshe Vardi. Benefits of bounded model checking at an industrial setting. In Proc. 13th International Computer Aided Verification Conference (CAV) , 2001.

[6]

James M. Crawford and Andrew B. Baker. Experimental results on the application of satisfiability algorithms to scheduling problems. In Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI- 94) , volume 2, pages 1092-1097, Seattle, Washington, USA, August 1994. AAAI Press/MIT Press.

[7]

M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. Loveland. A machine program for theorem proving. Journal of the ACM , 5(7), 1962.

[8]

Olivier Dubois and Gilles Dequen. A backbone-search heuristic for efficient solving of hard 3-SAT formulae. In Bernhard Nebel, editor, Proceedings of the seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-01) , pages 248-253, San Francisco, CA, August 4-10 2001. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

[9]

Michael Ernst, Todd Millstein, and Daniel Weld. Automatic SAT-compilation of planning problems. In Proc. IJCAI-97 , 1997.

[10]

E. Giunchiglia and R. Sebastiani. Applying the Davis-Putnam procedure to non-clausal formulas. In Evelina Lamma and Paola Mello, editors, Proceedings of AI*IA'99: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, LNAI 2175 , pages 84-94. Springer Verlag, 1999.

[11]

E. Giunchiglia, A. Massarotto, and R. Sebastiani. Act, and the rest will follow: Exploiting determinism in planning as satisfiability. In Proc. AAAI , 1998.

[12]

Enrico Giunchiglia, Marco Maratea, Armando Tacchella, and Davide Zambonin. Evaluating search heuristics and optimization techniques in propositional satisfiability. In Proc. of the International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR'2001), LNAI 2083 , 2001.

[13]

Robert G. Jeroslow and Jinchang Wang. Solving propositional satisfiability problems. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence , 1:167-187, 1990.

[14]

Henry Kautz and Bart Selman. BLACKBOX: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. In Working notes of the Workshop on Planning as Combinatorial Search, held in conjunction with AIPS-98 , 1998.

[15]

Chu Min Li and Anbulagan. Heuristics based on unit propagation for satisfiability problems. In Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97) , pages 366-371, San Francisco, August 23-29 1997. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

[16]

Chu Min Li. Integrating equivalence reasoning into Davis-Putnam procedure. In Proc. AAAI , 2000.

[17]

Massacci and Marraro. Logical cryptanalysis as a SAT problem. JAR: Journal of Automated Reasoning , 24, 2000.

[18]

D. S. Moore and G. P. McCabe. Introduction to the Practice of Statistics . W. H. Freeman and Co., 1993.

[19]

Daniele Pretolani. Satisfiability and Hypergraphs . PhD thesis, Università di Pisa, 1993.

[20]

Bart Selman, Henry Kautz, and David McAllester. Ten challenges in propositional reasoning and search. In Proc. IJCAI-97 , pages 50-54, 1997.

[21]

O. Shtrichman. Tuning SAT checkers for bounded model-checking. In Proc. 12th International Computer Aided Verification Conference (CAV) , 2000.

[22]

Alasdair Urquhart. The complexity of propositional proofs. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic , 1(4):425-467, December 1995.

Cited By

Ganai MBloem RSharygina N(2010)Propelling SAT and SAT-based BMC using caresetProceedings of the 2010 Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design10.5555/1998496.1998538(231-238)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1998496.1998538
Järvisalo MJunttila T(2009)Limitations of restricted branching in clause learningConstraints10.1007/s10601-008-9062-z14:3(325-356)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10601-008-9062-z
Lang JMarquis P(2008)On propositional definabilityArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2007.12.003172:8-9(991-1017)Online publication date: 1-May-2008
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.artint.2007.12.003
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

A finite state intersection approach to propositional satisfiability

We use a finite state (FSA) construction approach to address the problem of propositional satisfiability (SAT). We present a very simple translation from formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF) to regular expressions and use regular expressions to ...
Propositional satisfiability: techniques, algorithms and applications

Recent years have seen remarkable progress in propositional satisfiability (SAT). Despite the worst-case exponential run time of all known algorithms, SAT solvers can currently be used to solve hard benchmark problems.This PhD dissertation contributes ...
Variable and clause ordering in an FSA approach to propositional satisfiability
CIAA'11: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Implementation and application of automata

We use a finite state (FSA) construction approach to address the problem of propositional satisfiability (SAT). We use a very simple translation from formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF) to regular expressions and use regular expressions to ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Guide Proceedings

JELIA '02: Proceedings of the European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence

September 2002

572 pages

ISBN:3540441905

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 23 September 2002

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 06 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ganai MBloem RSharygina N(2010)Propelling SAT and SAT-based BMC using caresetProceedings of the 2010 Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design10.5555/1998496.1998538(231-238)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1998496.1998538
Järvisalo MJunttila T(2009)Limitations of restricted branching in clause learningConstraints10.1007/s10601-008-9062-z14:3(325-356)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10601-008-9062-z
Lang JMarquis P(2008)On propositional definabilityArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2007.12.003172:8-9(991-1017)Online publication date: 1-May-2008
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.artint.2007.12.003
Järvisalo MJunttila T(2007)Limitations of restricted branching in clause learningProceedings of the 13th international conference on Principles and practice of constraint programming10.5555/1771668.1771697(348-363)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1771668.1771697
Audemard GSaïs L(2007)Circuit based encoding of CNF formulaProceedings of the 10th international conference on Theory and applications of satisfiability testing10.5555/1768142.1768147(16-21)Online publication date: 28-May-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1768142.1768147
Zhang L(2006)Solving QBF with combined conjunctive and disjunctive normal formProceedings of the 21st national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 110.5555/1597538.1597562(143-149)Online publication date: 16-Jul-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1597538.1597562
Bordeaux LHamadi YZhang L(2006)Propositional Satisfiability and Constraint ProgrammingACM Computing Surveys10.1145/1177352.117735438:4(12-es)Online publication date: 25-Dec-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1177352.1177354
Liberatore P(2006)Complexity results on DPLL and resolutionACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/1119439.11194427:1(84-107)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1119439.1119442
Eén NBiere A(2005)Effective preprocessing in SAT through variable and clause eliminationProceedings of the 8th international conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing10.1007/11499107_5(61-75)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2005
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/11499107_5

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents