Efficient Certified Resolution Proof Checking

We present a novel propositional proof tracing format that eliminates complex processing, thus enabling efficient (formal) proof checking. The benefits of this format are demonstrated by implementing a proof checker in C, which outperforms a state-of-the-art checker by two orders of magnitude. We then formalize the theory underlying propositional proof checking in Coq, and extract a correct-by-construction proof checker for our format from the formalization. An empirical evaluation using 280 unsatisfiable instances from the 2015 and 2016 SAT competitions shows that this certified checker usually performs comparably to a state-of-the-art non-certified proof checker. Using this format, we formally verify the recent 200 TB proof of the Boolean Pythagorean Triples conjecture

Verified Propagation Redundancy and Compositional UNSAT Checking in CakeML

Modern SAT solvers can emit independently-checkable proof certificates to validate their results. The state-of-the-art proof system that allows for compact proof certificates is propagation redundancy (PR). However, the only existing method to validate proofs in this system with a formally verified tool requires a transformation to a weaker proof system, which can result in a significant blowup in the size of the proof and increased proof validation time. This article describes the first approach to formally verify PR proofs on a succinct representation. We present (i) a new Linear PR (LPR) proof format, (ii) an extension of the DPR-trim tool to efficiently convert PR proofs into LPR format, and (iii) cake_lpr, a verified LPR proof checker developed in CakeML. We also enhance these tools with (iv) a new compositional proof format designed to enable separate (parallel) proof checking. The LPR format is backwards compatible with the existing LRAT format, but extends LRAT with support for the addition of PR clauses. Moreover, cake_lpr is verified using CakeML ’s binary code extraction toolchain, which yields correctness guarantees for its machine code (binary) implementation. This further distinguishes our clausal proof checker from existing checkers because unverified extraction and compilation tools are removed from its trusted computing base. We experimentally show that: LPR provides efficiency gains over existing proof formats; cake_lpr ’s strong correctness guarantees are obtained without significant sacrifice in its performance; and the compositional proof format enables scalable parallel proof checking for large proofs

Faster LRAT Checking Than Solving with CaDiCaL

DRAT is the standard proof format used in the SAT Competition. It is easy to generate but checking proofs often takes even more time than solving the problem. An alternative is to use the LRAT proof system. While LRAT is easier and way more efficient to check, it is more complex to generate directly. Due to this complexity LRAT is not supported natively by any state-of-the-art SAT solver. Therefore Carneiro and Heule proposed the mixed proof format FRAT which still suffers from costly intermediate translation. We present an extension to the state-of-the-art solver CaDiCaL which is able to generate LRAT natively for all procedures implemented in CaDiCaL. We further present Lrat-Trim, a tool which not only trims and checks LRAT proofs in both ASCII and binary format but also produces clausal cores and has been tested thoroughly. Our experiments on recent competition benchmarks show that our approach reduces time of proof generation and certification substantially compared to competing approaches using intermediate DRAT or FRAT proofs

cake_lpr: Verified Propagation Redundancy Checking in CakeML

Modern SAT solvers can emit independently checkable proof certificates to validate their results. The state-of-the-art proof system that allows for compact proof certificates is propagation redundancy (PR). However, the only existing method to validate proofs in this system with a formally verified tool requires a transformation to a weaker proof system, which can result in a significant blowup in the size of the proof and increased proof validation time. This paper describes the first approach to formally verify PR proofs on a succinct representation; we present (i) a new Linear PR (LPR) proof format, (ii) a tool to efficiently convert PR proofs into LPR format, and (iii) cake_lpr, a verified LPR proof checker developed in CakeML. The LPR format is backwards compatible with the existing LRAT format, but extends the latter with support for the addition of PR clauses. Moreover, cake_lpr is verified using CakeML’s binary code extraction toolchain, which yields correctness guarantees for its machine code (binary) implementation. This further distinguishes our clausal proof checker from existing ones because unverified extraction and compilation tools are removed from its trusted computing base. We experimentally show that LPR provides efficiency gains over existing proof formats and that the strong correctness guarantees are obtained without significant sacrifice in the performance of the verified executable

Nonexistence Certificates for Ovals in a Projective Plane of Order Ten

In 1983, a computer search was performed for ovals in a projective plane of order ten. The search was exhaustive and negative, implying that such ovals do not exist. However, no nonexistence certificates were produced by this search, and to the best of our knowledge the search has never been independently verified. In this paper, we rerun the search for ovals in a projective plane of order ten and produce a collection of nonexistence certificates that, when taken together, imply that such ovals do not exist. Our search program uses the cube-and-conquer paradigm from the field of satisfiability (SAT) checking, coupled with a programmatic SAT solver and the nauty symbolic computation library for removing symmetries from the search.Comment: Appears in the Proceedings of the 31st International Workshop on Combinatorial Algorithms (IWOCA 2020

Certified Knowledge Compilation with Application to Verified Model Counting

Computing many useful properties of Boolean formulas, such as their weighted or unweighted model count, is intractable on general representations. It can become tractable when formulas are expressed in a special form, such as the decision-decomposable, negation normal form (dec-DNNF) . Knowledge compilation is the process of converting a formula into such a form. Unfortunately existing knowledge compilers provide no guarantee that their output correctly represents the original formula, and therefore they cannot validate a model count, or any other computed value. We present Partitioned-Operation Graphs (POGs), a form that can encode all of the representations used by existing knowledge compilers. We have designed CPOG, a framework that can express proofs of equivalence between a POG and a Boolean formula in conjunctive normal form (CNF). We have developed a program that generates POG representations from dec-DNNF graphs produced by the state-of-the-art knowledge compiler D4, as well as checkable CPOG proofs certifying that the output POGs are equivalent to the input CNF formulas. Our toolchain for generating and verifying POGs scales to all but the largest graphs produced by D4 for formulas from a recent model counting competition. Additionally, we have developed a formally verified CPOG checker and model counter for POGs in the Lean 4 proof assistant. In doing so, we proved the soundness of our proof framework. These programs comprise the first formally verified toolchain for weighted and unweighted model counting