Recursive Online Enumeration of All Minimal Unsatisfiable Subsets

In various areas of computer science, we deal with a set of constraints to be satisfied. If the constraints cannot be satisfied simultaneously, it is desirable to identify the core problems among them. Such cores are called minimal unsatisfiable subsets (MUSes). The more MUSes are identified, the more information about the conflicts among the constraints is obtained. However, a full enumeration of all MUSes is in general intractable due to the large number (even exponential) of possible conflicts. Moreover, to identify MUSes algorithms must test sets of constraints for their simultaneous satisfiabilty. The type of the test depends on the application domains. The complexity of tests can be extremely high especially for domains like temporal logics, model checking, or SMT. In this paper, we propose a recursive algorithm that identifies MUSes in an online manner (i.e., one by one) and can be terminated at any time. The key feature of our algorithm is that it minimizes the number of satisfiability tests and thus speeds up the computation. The algorithm is applicable to an arbitrary constraint domain and its effectiveness demonstrates itself especially in domains with expensive satisfiability checks. We benchmark our algorithm against state of the art algorithm on Boolean and SMT constraint domains and demonstrate that our algorithm really requires less satisfiability tests and consequently finds more MUSes in given time limits

Core-guided minimal correction set and core enumeration

A set of constraints is unsatisfiable if there is no solution that satisfies these constraints. To analyse unsatisfiable problems, the user needs to understand where inconsistencies come from and how they can be repaired. Minimal unsatisfiable cores and correction sets are important subsets of constraints that enable such analysis. In this work, we propose a new algorithm for extracting minimal unsatisfiable cores and correction sets simultaneously. Building on top of the relaxation and strengthening framework, we introduce novel techniques for extracting these sets. Our new solver significantly outperforms several state of the art algorithms on common benchmarks when it comes to extracting correction sets and compares favorably on core extraction.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Engineering SAT Applications

Das Erfüllbarkeitsproblem der Aussagenlogik (SAT) ist nicht nur in der theoretischen Informatik ein grundlegendes Problem, da alle NP-vollständigen Probleme auf SAT zurückgeführt werden können. Durch die Entwicklung von sehr effizienten SAT Lösern sind in den vergangenen 15 Jahren auch eine Vielzahl von praktischen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten entwickelt worden. Zu den bekanntesten gehört die Verifikation von Hardware- und Software-Bausteinen. Bei der Berechnung von unerfüllbaren SAT-Problemen sind Entwickler und Anwender oftmals an einer Erklärung für die Unerfüllbarkeit interessiert. Eine Möglichkeit diese zu ermitteln ist die Berechnung von minimal unerfüllbaren Teilformeln. Es sind drei grundlegend verschiedene Strategien zur Berechnung dieser Teilformeln bekannt: mittels Einfügen von Klauseln in ein erfüllbares Teilproblem, durch Entfernen von Kauseln aus einem unerfüllbaren Teilproblem und eine Kombination der beiden erstgenannten Methoden. In der vorliegenden Arbeit entwickeln wir zuerst eine interaktive Variante der Strategie, die auf Entfernen von Klauseln basiert. Sie ermöglicht es den Anwendern interessante Bereiche des Suchraumes manuell zu erschließen und aussagekräftige Erklärung für die Unerfüllbarkeit zu ermitteln. Der theoretische Hintergrund, der für die interaktive Berechnung von minimal unerfüllbaren Teilformeln entwickelt wurde, um dem Benutzer des Prototyps unnötige Schritte in der Berechnung der Teilformeln zu ersparen werden im Anschluss für die automatische Aufzählung von mehreren minimal unerfüllbaren Teilformeln verwendet, um dort die aktuell schnellsten Algorithmen weiter zu verbessern. Die Idee dabei ist mehrere Klauseln zu einem Block zusammenzufassen. Wir zeigen, wie diese Blöcke die Berechnungen von minimal unerfüllbaren Teilformeln positiv beeinflussen können. Durch die Implementierung eines Prototypen, der auf den aktuellen Methoden basiert, konnten wir die Effektivität unserer entwickelten Ideen belegen. Nachdem wir im ersten Teil der Arbeit grundlegende Algorithmen, die bei unerfüllbaren SAT-Problemen angewendet werden, verbessert haben, wenden wir uns im zweiten Teil der Arbeit neuen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten für SAT zu. Zuerst steht dabei ein Problem aus der Bioinformatik im Mittelpunkt. Wir lösen das sogenannte Kompatibilitätproblem für evolutionäre Bäume mittels einer Kodierung als Erfüllbarkeitsproblem und zeigen anschließend, wie wir mithilfe dieser neuen Kodierung ein nah verwandtes Optimierungsproblem lösen können. Den von uns neu entwickelten Ansatz vergleichen wir im Anschluss mit den bisher effektivsten Ansätzen das Optmierungsproblem zu lösen. Wir konnten zeigen, dass wir für den überwiegenden Teil der getesteten Instanzen neue Bestwerte in der Berechnungszeit erreichen. Die zweite neue Anwendung von SAT ist ein Problem aus der Graphentheorie, bzw. dem Graphenzeichen. Durch eine schlichte, intuitive, aber dennoch effektive Formulierung war es uns möglich neue Resultate für das Book Embedding Problem zu ermitteln. Zum einen konnten wir eine nicht triviale untere Schranke von vier für die benötigte Seitenzahl von 1-planaren Graphen ermitteln. Zum anderen konnten wir zeigen, dass es nicht für jeden planaren Graphen möglich ist, eine Einbettung in drei Seiten mittels einer sogenannten Schnyder-Aufteilung in drei verschiedene Bäume zu berechnen

Logic-Based Explainability in Machine Learning

The last decade witnessed an ever-increasing stream of successes in Machine Learning (ML). These successes offer clear evidence that ML is bound to become pervasive in a wide range of practical uses, including many that directly affect humans. Unfortunately, the operation of the most successful ML models is incomprehensible for human decision makers. As a result, the use of ML models, especially in high-risk and safety-critical settings is not without concern. In recent years, there have been efforts on devising approaches for explaining ML models. Most of these efforts have focused on so-called model-agnostic approaches. However, all model-agnostic and related approaches offer no guarantees of rigor, hence being referred to as non-formal. For example, such non-formal explanations can be consistent with different predictions, which renders them useless in practice. This paper overviews the ongoing research efforts on computing rigorous model-based explanations of ML models; these being referred to as formal explanations. These efforts encompass a variety of topics, that include the actual definitions of explanations, the characterization of the complexity of computing explanations, the currently best logical encodings for reasoning about different ML models, and also how to make explanations interpretable for human decision makers, among others

Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design – FMCAD 2021

The Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD) is an annual conference on the theory and applications of formal methods in hardware and system verification. FMCAD provides a leading forum to researchers in academia and industry for presenting and discussing groundbreaking methods, technologies, theoretical results, and tools for reasoning formally about computing systems. FMCAD covers formal aspects of computer-aided system design including verification, specification, synthesis, and testing

MaxSAT-Based Bi-Objective Boolean Optimization

Peer reviewe

A Maximum Satisfiability Based Approach to Bi-Objective Boolean Optimization

Many real-world problem settings give rise to NP-hard combinatorial optimization problems. This results in a need for non-trivial algorithmic approaches for finding optimal solutions to such problems. Many such approaches—ranging from probabilistic and meta-heuristic algorithms to declarative programming—have been presented for optimization problems with a single objective. Less work has been done on approaches for optimization problems with multiple objectives. We present BiOptSat, an exact declarative approach for finding so-called Pareto-optimal solutions to bi-objective optimization problems. A bi-objective optimization problem arises for example when learning interpretable classifiers and the size, as well as the classification error of the classifier should be taken into account as objectives. Using propositional logic as a declarative programming language, we seek to extend the progress and success in maximum satisfiability (MaxSAT) solving to two objectives. BiOptSat can be viewed as an instantiation of the lexicographic method and makes use of a single SAT solver that is preserved throughout the entire search procedure. It allows for solving three tasks for bi-objective optimization: finding a single Pareto-optimal solution, finding one representative solution for each Pareto point, and enumerating all Pareto-optimal solutions. We provide an open-source implementation of five variants of BiOptSat, building on different algorithms proposed for MaxSAT. Additionally, we empirically evaluate these five variants, comparing their runtime performance to that of three key competing algorithmic approaches. The empirical comparison in the contexts of learning interpretable decision rules and bi-objective set covering shows practical benefits of our approach. Furthermore, for the best-performing variant of BiOptSat, we study the effects of proposed refinements to determine their effectiveness

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

This book is Open Access under a CC BY licence. The LNCS 11427 and 11428 proceedings set constitutes the proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS 2019, which took place in Prague, Czech Republic, in April 2019, held as part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2019. The total of 42 full and 8 short tool demo papers presented in these volumes was carefully reviewed and selected from 164 submissions. The papers are organized in topical sections as follows: Part I: SAT and SMT, SAT solving and theorem proving; verification and analysis; model checking; tool demo; and machine learning. Part II: concurrent and distributed systems; monitoring and runtime verification; hybrid and stochastic systems; synthesis; symbolic verification; and safety and fault-tolerant systems