Heuristics for the refinement of assumptions in generalized reactivity formulae

Reactive synthesis is concerned with automatically generating implementations from formal specifications. These specifications are typically written in the language of generalized reactivity (GR(1)), a subset of linear temporal logic capable of expressing the most common industrial specification patterns, and describe the requirements about the behavior of a system under assumptions about the environment where the system is to be deployed. Oftentimes no implementation exists which guarantees the required behavior under all possible environments, typically due to missing assumptions (this is usually referred to as unrealizability). To address this issue, new assumptions need to be added to complete the specification, a problem known as assumptions refinement. Since the space of candidate assumptions is intractably large, searching for the best solutions is inherently hard. In particular, new methods are needed to (i) increase the effectiveness of the search procedures, measured as the ratio between the number of solutions found and of refinements explored; and (ii) improve the results' quality, defined as the weakness of the solutions. In this thesis we propose a set of heuristics to meet these goals, and a methodology to assess and compare assumptions refinement methods based on quantitative metrics. The heuristics are in the form of algorithms to generate candidate refinements during the search, and quantitative measures to assess the quality of the candidates. We first discuss a heuristic method to generate assumptions that target the cause of unrealizability. This is done by selecting candidate refinement formulas based on Craig's interpolation. We provide a formal underpinning of the technique and evaluate it in terms of our new metric of effectiveness, as defined above, whose value is improved with respect to the state of the art. We demonstrate this on a set of popular benchmarks of embedded software. We then provide a formal, quantitative characterization of the permissiveness of environment assumptions in the form of a weakness measure. We prove that the partial order induced by this measure is consistent with the one induced by implication. The key advantage of this measure is that it allows for prioritizing candidate solutions, as we show experimentally. Lastly, we propose a notion of minimal refinements with respect to the observed counterstrategies. We demonstrate that exploring minimal refinements produces weaker solutions, and reduces the amount of computations needed to explore each refinement. However, this may come at the cost of reducing the effectiveness of the search. To counteract this effect, we propose a hybrid search approach in which both minimal and non-minimal refinements are explored.Open Acces

Branching strategies for mixed-integer programs containing logical constraints and decomposable structure

Decision-making optimisation problems can include discrete selections, e.g. selecting a route, arranging non-overlapping items or designing a network of items. Branch-and-bound (B&B), a widely applied divide-and-conquer framework, often solves such problems by considering a continuous approximation, e.g. replacing discrete variable domains by a continuous superset. Such approximations weaken the logical relations, e.g. for discrete variables corresponding to Boolean variables. Branching in B&B reintroduces logical relations by dividing the search space. This thesis studies designing B&B branching strategies, i.e. how to divide the search space, for optimisation problems that contain both a logical and a continuous structure. We begin our study with a large-scale, industrially-relevant optimisation problem where the objective consists of machine-learnt gradient-boosted trees (GBTs) and convex penalty functions. GBT functions contain if-then queries which introduces a logical structure to this problem. We propose decomposition-based rigorous bounding strategies and an iterative heuristic that can be embedded into a B&B algorithm. We approach branching with two strategies: a pseudocost initialisation and strong branching that target the structure of GBT and convex penalty aspects of the optimisation objective, respectively. Computational tests show that our B&B approach outperforms state-of-the-art solvers in deriving rigorous bounds on optimality. Our second project investigates how satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) derived unsatisfiable cores may be utilised in a B&B context. Unsatisfiable cores are subsets of constraints that explain an infeasible result. We study two-dimensional bin packing (2BP) and develop a B&B algorithm that branches on SMT unsatisfiable cores. We use the unsatisfiable cores to derive cuts that break 2BP symmetries. Computational results show that our B&B algorithm solves 20% more instances when compared with commercial solvers on the tested instances. Finally, we study convex generalized disjunctive programming (GDP), a framework that supports logical variables and operators. Convex GDP includes disjunctions of mathematical constraints, which motivate branching by partitioning the disjunctions. We investigate separation by branching, i.e. eliminating solutions that prevent rigorous bound improvement, and propose a greedy algorithm for building the branches. We propose three scoring methods for selecting the next branching disjunction. We also analyse how to leverage infeasibility to expedite the B&B search. Computational results show that our scoring methods can reduce the number of explored B&B nodes by an order of magnitude when compared with scoring methods proposed in literature. Our infeasibility analysis further reduces the number of explored nodes.Open Acces