Planning as Quantified Boolean Formulae

This work explores the idea of classical Planning as Quantified Boolean Formulae. Planning as Satisfiability (SAT) is a popular approach to Planning and has been explored in detail producing many compact and efficient encodings, Planning-specific solver implementations and innovative new constraints. However, Planning as Quantified Boolean Formulae (QBF) has been relegated to conformant Planning approaches, with the exception of one encoding that has not yet been investigated in detail. QBF is a promising setting for Planning given that the problems have the same complexity. This work introduces two approaches for translating bounded propositional reachability problems into QBF. Both exploit the expressivity of the binarytree structure of the QBF problem to produce encodings that are as small as logarithmic in the size of the instance and thus exponentially smaller than the corresponding SAT encoding with the same bound. The first approach builds on the iterative squaring formulation of Rintanen; the intuition behind the idea is to recursively fold the plan around the midpoint, reducing the number of time-steps that need to be described from n to log₂n. The second approach exploits domain-level lifting to achieve significant improvements in efficiency. Experimentation was performed to compare our formulation of the first approach with the previous formulation, and to compare both approaches with comparative and state-of-the-art SAT approaches. Results presented in this work show that our formulation of the first approach is an improvement over the previous, and that both approaches produce encodings that are indeed much smaller than corresponding SAT encodings, in both terms of encoding size and memory used during solving. Evidence is also provided to show that the first approach is feasible, if not yet competitive with the state-of-the-art, and that the second approach produces superior encodings to the SAT encodings when the domain is suited to domain-level lifting.This work explores the idea of classical Planning as Quantified Boolean Formulae. Planning as Satisfiability (SAT) is a popular approach to Planning and has been explored in detail producing many compact and efficient encodings, Planning-specific solver implementations and innovative new constraints. However, Planning as Quantified Boolean Formulae (QBF) has been relegated to conformant Planning approaches, with the exception of one encoding that has not yet been investigated in detail. QBF is a promising setting for Planning given that the problems have the same complexity. This work introduces two approaches for translating bounded propositional reachability problems into QBF. Both exploit the expressivity of the binarytree structure of the QBF problem to produce encodings that are as small as logarithmic in the size of the instance and thus exponentially smaller than the corresponding SAT encoding with the same bound. The first approach builds on the iterative squaring formulation of Rintanen; the intuition behind the idea is to recursively fold the plan around the midpoint, reducing the number of time-steps that need to be described from n to log₂n. The second approach exploits domain-level lifting to achieve significant improvements in efficiency. Experimentation was performed to compare our formulation of the first approach with the previous formulation, and to compare both approaches with comparative and state-of-the-art SAT approaches. Results presented in this work show that our formulation of the first approach is an improvement over the previous, and that both approaches produce encodings that are indeed much smaller than corresponding SAT encodings, in both terms of encoding size and memory used during solving. Evidence is also provided to show that the first approach is feasible, if not yet competitive with the state-of-the-art, and that the second approach produces superior encodings to the SAT encodings when the domain is suited to domain-level lifting

Automated Benchmarking of Incremental SAT and QBF Solvers

Incremental SAT and QBF solving potentially yields improvements when sequences of related formulas are solved. An incremental application is usually tailored towards some specific solver and decomposes a problem into incremental solver calls. This hinders the independent comparison of different solvers, particularly when the application program is not available. As a remedy, we present an approach to automated benchmarking of incremental SAT and QBF solvers. Given a collection of formulas in (Q)DIMACS format generated incrementally by an application program, our approach automatically translates the formulas into instructions to import and solve a formula by an incremental SAT/QBF solver. The result of the translation is a program which replays the incremental solver calls and thus allows to evaluate incremental solvers independently from the application program. We illustrate our approach by different hardware verification problems for SAT and QBF solvers.Comment: camera-ready version (8 pages + 2 pages appendix), to appear in the proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning (LPAR), LNCS, Springer, 201