A Simple and Flexible Way of Computing Small Unsatisfiable Cores in SAT Modulo Theories

Finding small unsatisfiable cores for SAT problems has recently received a lot of interest, mostly for its applications in formal verification. However, propositional logic is often not expressive enough for representing many interesting verification problems, which can be more naturally addressed in the framework of Satisfiability Modulo Theories, SMT. Surprisingly, the problem of finding unsatisfiable cores in SMT has received very little attention in the literature; in particular, we are not aware of any work aiming at producing small unsatisfiable cores in SMT. In this paper we present a novel approach to this problem. The main idea is to combine an SMT solver with an external propositional core extractor: the SMT solver produces the theory lemmas found during the search; the core extractor is then called on the boolean abstraction of the original SMT problem and of the theory lemmas. This results in an unsatisfiable core for the original SMT problem, once the remaining theory lemmas have been removed. The approach is conceptually interesting, since the SMT solver is used to dynamically lift the suitable amount of theory information to the boolean level, and it also has several advantages in practice. In fact, it is extremely simple to implement and to update, and it can be interfaced with every propositional core extractor in a plug-and-play manner, so that to benefit for free of all unsat-core reduction techniques which have been or will be made available. We have evaluated our approach by an extensive empirical test on SMT-LIB benchmarks, which confirms the validity and potential of this approach

Proof Generation from Delta-Decisions

We show how to generate and validate logical proofs of unsatisfiability from delta-complete decision procedures that rely on error-prone numerical algorithms. Solving this problem is important for ensuring correctness of the decision procedures. At the same time, it is a new approach for automated theorem proving over real numbers. We design a first-order calculus, and transform the computational steps of constraint solving into logic proofs, which are then validated using proof-checking algorithms. As an application, we demonstrate how proofs generated from our solver can establish many nonlinear lemmas in the the formal proof of the Kepler Conjecture.Comment: Appeared in SYNASC'1

Understanding the complexity of #SAT using knowledge compilation

Two main techniques have been used so far to solve the #P-hard problem #SAT. The first one, used in practice, is based on an extension of DPLL for model counting called exhaustive DPLL. The second approach, more theoretical, exploits the structure of the input to compute the number of satisfying assignments by usually using a dynamic programming scheme on a decomposition of the formula. In this paper, we make a first step toward the separation of these two techniques by exhibiting a family of formulas that can be solved in polynomial time with the first technique but needs an exponential time with the second one. We show this by observing that both techniques implicitely construct a very specific boolean circuit equivalent to the input formula. We then show that every beta-acyclic formula can be represented by a polynomial size circuit corresponding to the first method and exhibit a family of beta-acyclic formulas which cannot be represented by polynomial size circuits corresponding to the second method. This result shed a new light on the complexity of #SAT and related problems on beta-acyclic formulas. As a byproduct, we give new handy tools to design algorithms on beta-acyclic hypergraphs

Integrating Conflict Driven Clause Learning to Local Search

This article introduces SatHyS (SAT HYbrid Solver), a novel hybrid approach for propositional satisfiability. It combines local search and conflict driven clause learning (CDCL) scheme. Each time the local search part reaches a local minimum, the CDCL is launched. For SAT problems it behaves like a tabu list, whereas for UNSAT ones, the CDCL part tries to focus on minimum unsatisfiable sub-formula (MUS). Experimental results show good performances on many classes of SAT instances from the last SAT competitions

Extracting verified decision procedures: DPLL and Resolution

This article is concerned with the application of the program extraction technique to a new class of problems: the synthesis of decision procedures for the classical satisfiability problem that are correct by construction. To this end, we formalize a completeness proof for the DPLL proof system and extract a SAT solver from it. When applied to a propositional formula in conjunctive normal form the program produces either a satisfying assignment or a DPLL derivation showing its unsatisfiability. We use non-computational quantifiers to remove redundant computational content from the extracted program and translate it into Haskell to improve performance. We also prove the equivalence between the resolution proof system and the DPLL proof system with a bound on the size of the resulting resolution proof. This demonstrates that it is possible to capture quantitative information about the extracted program on the proof level. The formalization is carried out in the interactive proof assistant Minlog

Generating Schemata of Resolution Proofs

Two distinct algorithms are presented to extract (schemata of) resolution proofs from closed tableaux for propositional schemata. The first one handles the most efficient version of the tableau calculus but generates very complex derivations (denoted by rather elaborate rewrite systems). The second one has the advantage that much simpler systems can be obtained, however the considered proof procedure is less efficient

Efficient Combination of Decision Procedure for MUS Computation

International audienceIn recent years, the problem of extracting a MUS (Minimal Unsatisfiable Subformula) from an unsatisfiable CNF has received much attention. Indeed, when a Boolean formula is proved unsatisfiable, it does not necessarily mean that all its clauses take part to the inconsistency; a small subset of them can be conflicting and make the whole set without any solution. Localizing a MUS can thus be extremely valuable, since it enables to circumscribe a minimal set of constraints that represents a cause for the infeasibility of the CNF. In this paper, we introduce a novel, original framework for computing a MUS. Whereas most of the existing approaches are based on complete algorithms, we propose an approach that makes use of both local and complete searches. Our combination is empirically evaluated against the current best techniques on a large set of benchmarks