On Optimization Modulo Theories, MaxSMT and Sorting Networks

Optimization Modulo Theories (OMT) is an extension of SMT which allows for finding models that optimize given objectives. (Partial weighted) MaxSMT --or equivalently OMT with Pseudo-Boolean objective functions, OMT+PB-- is a very-relevant strict subcase of OMT. We classify existing approaches for MaxSMT or OMT+PB in two groups: MaxSAT-based approaches exploit the efficiency of state-of-the-art MAXSAT solvers, but they are specific-purpose and not always applicable; OMT-based approaches are general-purpose, but they suffer from intrinsic inefficiencies on MaxSMT/OMT+PB problems. We identify a major source of such inefficiencies, and we address it by enhancing OMT by means of bidirectional sorting networks. We implemented this idea on top of the OptiMathSAT OMT solver. We run an extensive empirical evaluation on a variety of problems, comparing MaxSAT-based and OMT-based techniques, with and without sorting networks, implemented on top of OptiMathSAT and {\nu}Z. The results support the effectiveness of this idea, and provide interesting insights about the different approaches.Comment: 17 pages, submitted at Tacas 1

Pushing the envelope of Optimization Modulo Theories with Linear-Arithmetic Cost Functions

In the last decade we have witnessed an impressive progress in the expressiveness and efficiency of Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solving techniques. This has brought previously-intractable problems at the reach of state-of-the-art SMT solvers, in particular in the domain of SW and HW verification. Many SMT-encodable problems of interest, however, require also the capability of finding models that are optimal wrt. some cost functions. In previous work, namely "Optimization Modulo Theory with Linear Rational Cost Functions -- OMT(LAR U T )", we have leveraged SMT solving to handle the minimization of cost functions on linear arithmetic over the rationals, by means of a combination of SMT and LP minimization techniques. In this paper we push the envelope of our OMT approach along three directions: first, we extend it to work also with linear arithmetic on the mixed integer/rational domain, by means of a combination of SMT, LP and ILP minimization techniques; second, we develop a multi-objective version of OMT, so that to handle many cost functions simultaneously; third, we develop an incremental version of OMT, so that to exploit the incrementality of some OMT-encodable problems. An empirical evaluation performed on OMT-encoded verification problems demonstrates the usefulness and efficiency of these extensions.Comment: A slightly-shorter version of this paper is published at TACAS 2015 conferenc

Deciding Quantifier-Free Presburger Formulas Using Parameterized Solution Bounds

Given a formula in quantifier-free Presburger arithmetic, if it has a satisfying solution, there is one whose size, measured in bits, is polynomially bounded in the size of the formula. In this paper, we consider a special class of quantifier-free Presburger formulas in which most linear constraints are difference (separation) constraints, and the non-difference constraints are sparse. This class has been observed to commonly occur in software verification. We derive a new solution bound in terms of parameters characterizing the sparseness of linear constraints and the number of non-difference constraints, in addition to traditional measures of formula size. In particular, we show that the number of bits needed per integer variable is linear in the number of non-difference constraints and logarithmic in the number and size of non-zero coefficients in them, but is otherwise independent of the total number of linear constraints in the formula. The derived bound can be used in a decision procedure based on instantiating integer variables over a finite domain and translating the input quantifier-free Presburger formula to an equi-satisfiable Boolean formula, which is then checked using a Boolean satisfiability solver. In addition to our main theoretical result, we discuss several optimizations for deriving tighter bounds in practice. Empirical evidence indicates that our decision procedure can greatly outperform other decision procedures.Comment: 26 page

Computer Architectures to Close the Loop in Real-time Optimization

© 2015 IEEE.Many modern control, automation, signal processing and machine learning applications rely on solving a sequence of optimization problems, which are updated with measurements of a real system that evolves in time. The solutions of each of these optimization problems are then used to make decisions, which may be followed by changing some parameters of the physical system, thereby resulting in a feedback loop between the computing and the physical system. Real-time optimization is not the same as fast optimization, due to the fact that the computation is affected by an uncertain system that evolves in time. The suitability of a design should therefore not be judged from the optimality of a single optimization problem, but based on the evolution of the entire cyber-physical system. The algorithms and hardware used for solving a single optimization problem in the office might therefore be far from ideal when solving a sequence of real-time optimization problems. Instead of there being a single, optimal design, one has to trade-off a number of objectives, including performance, robustness, energy usage, size and cost. We therefore provide here a tutorial introduction to some of the questions and implementation issues that arise in real-time optimization applications. We will concentrate on some of the decisions that have to be made when designing the computing architecture and algorithm and argue that the choice of one informs the other

Certified Roundoff Error Bounds using Bernstein Expansions and Sparse Krivine-Stengle Representations

Floating point error is an inevitable drawback of embedded systems implementation. Computing rigorous upper bounds of roundoff errors is absolutely necessary to the validation of critical software. This problem is even more challenging when addressing non-linear programs. In this paper, we propose and compare two new methods based on Bernstein expansions and sparse Krivine-Stengle representations, adapted from the field of the global optimization to compute upper bounds of roundoff errors for programs implementing polynomial functions. We release two related software package FPBern and FPKiSten, and compare them with state of the art tools. We show that these two methods achieve competitive performance, while computing accurate upper bounds by comparison with other tools.Comment: 20 pages, 2 table