Local Consistency and SAT-Solvers

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Automated abstraction refinement II Heuristic aspects Ken McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs.
Advertisements

The behavior of SAT solvers in model checking applications K. L. McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs.
Exploiting SAT solvers in unbounded model checking
Exploiting SAT solvers in unbounded model checking K. L. McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs.
INHERENT LIMITATIONS OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS CSci 4011.
The Model Evolution Calculus with Built-in Theories Peter Baumgartner MPI Informatik, Saarbrücken
1 Finite Constraint Domains. 2 u Constraint satisfaction problems (CSP) u A backtracking solver u Node and arc consistency u Bounds consistency u Generalized.
Dana Nau: Lecture slides for Automated Planning Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License:
Proofs from SAT Solvers Yeting Ge ACSys NYU Nov
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Chapter 8 The Theory of NP-Completeness.
SAT and Model Checking. Bounded Model Checking (BMC) A.I. Planning problems: can we reach a desired state in k steps? Verification of safety properties:
CSC5160 Topics in Algorithms Tutorial 2 Introduction to NP-Complete Problems Feb Jerry Le
1 Boolean Satisfiability in Electronic Design Automation (EDA ) By Kunal P. Ganeshpure.
Algorithms in Exponential Time. Outline Backtracking Local Search Randomization: Reducing to a Polynomial-Time Case Randomization: Permuting the Evaluation.
GRASP-an efficient SAT solver Pankaj Chauhan. 6/19/ : GRASP and Chaff2 What is SAT? Given a propositional formula in CNF, find an assignment.
Complexity 19-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov More Probabilistic Algorithms.
130 September 2003 Tractability by Approximating Constraint Languages Martin Green and David Cohen CP 2003 Ninth International Conference on Principles.
Search in the semantic domain. Some definitions atomic formula: smallest formula possible (no sub- formulas) literal: atomic formula or negation of an.
Last time Proof-system search ( ` ) Interpretation search ( ² ) Quantifiers Equality Decision procedures Induction Cross-cutting aspectsMain search strategy.
1 Understanding the Power of Clause Learning Ashish Sabharwal, Paul Beame, Henry Kautz University of Washington, Seattle IJCAI ConferenceAug 14, 2003.
Integer Programming Difference from linear programming –Variables x i must take on integral values, not real values Lots of interesting problems can be.
Stochastic greedy local search Chapter 7 ICS-275 Spring 2007.
1 Abstraction Refinement for Bounded Model Checking Anubhav Gupta, CMU Ofer Strichman, Technion Highly Jet Lagged.
10/28 Homework 3 returned Homework 4 socket opened (No office hours today) Where hard problems are Phase Transition.
SAT Solving Presented by Avi Yadgar. The SAT Problem Given a Boolean formula, look for assignment A for such that.  A is a solution for. A partial assignment.
1 Constraint Programming: An Introduction Adapted by Cristian OLIVA from Peter Stuckey (1998) Ho Chi Minh City.
Graph Coalition Structure Generation Maria Polukarov University of Southampton Joint work with Tom Voice and Nick Jennings HUJI, 25 th September 2011.
1 The Theory of NP-Completeness 2012/11/6 P: the class of problems which can be solved by a deterministic polynomial algorithm. NP : the class of decision.
SAT and SMT solvers Ayrat Khalimov (based on Georg Hofferek‘s slides) AKDV 2014.
Solvers for the Problem of Boolean Satisfiability (SAT) Will Klieber Aug 31, 2011 TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you.
EMIS 8373: Integer Programming NP-Complete Problems updated 21 April 2009.
Unification Algorithm Input: a finite set Σ of simple expressions Output: a mgu for Σ (if Σ is unifiable) 1. Set k = 0 and  0 = . 2. If Σ  k is a singleton,
1 The Theory of NP-Completeness 2 Cook ’ s Theorem (1971) Prof. Cook Toronto U. Receiving Turing Award (1982) Discussing difficult problems: worst case.
Boolean Satisfiability Present and Future
Stochastic greedy local search Chapter 7 ICS-275 Spring 2009.
SAT 2009 Ashish Sabharwal Backdoors in the Context of Learning (short paper) Bistra Dilkina, Carla P. Gomes, Ashish Sabharwal Cornell University SAT-09.
Maximum Density Still Life Symmetries and Lazy Clause Generation Geoffrey Chu, Maria Garcia de la Banda, Chris Mears, Peter J. Stuckey.
CSE 589 Part V One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one’s work is terribly important. Bertrand Russell.
Nikolaj Bjørner Microsoft Research DTU Winter course January 2 nd 2012 Organized by Flemming Nielson & Hanne Riis Nielson.
Planning as Satisfiability (SAT-Plan). SAT-Plan Translate the planning problem into a satisfiability problem for length n of Plan garb 0 (proposition)present.
Making Path-Consistency Stronger for SAT Pavel Surynek Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University in Prague Czech Republic.
Solving the Logic Satisfiability problem Solving the Logic Satisfiability problem Jesus De Loera.
SAT Solving As implemented in - DPLL solvers: GRASP, Chaff and
Inference in Propositional Logic (and Intro to SAT) CSE 473.
CSE 421 Algorithms Richard Anderson Lecture 27 NP-Completeness Proofs.
Automatic Test Generation
EA C461 Artificial Intelligence
The Theory of NP-Completeness
Inference in Propositional Logic (and Intro to SAT)
Inference and search for the propositional satisfiability problem
Richard Anderson Lecture 26 NP-Completeness
Advanced Algorithms Analysis and Design
Gábor Kusper University of Linz RISC Austria
Computability and Complexity
On the Power of Clause-Learning SAT Solvers with Restarts
Richard Anderson Lecture 26 NP-Completeness
Instructor: Vincent Conitzer
Directional Resolution: The Davis-Putnam Procedure, Revisited
CS B551: Elements of Artificial Intelligence
Resolution over Linear Equations: (Partial) Survey & Open Problems
ICS 353: Design and Analysis of Algorithms
Complexity 6-1 The Class P Complexity Andrei Bulatov.
Exclusive and essential sets of implicates of a Boolean function
ECE 667 Synthesis and Verification of Digital Circuits
Richard Anderson Lecture 28 NP-Completeness
DLL Algorithm.
Advanced consistency methods Chapter 8
The Theory of NP-Completeness
GRASP-an efficient SAT solver
Presentation transcript:

Local Consistency and SAT-Solvers K-consistency and SAT Teague Lasser Petke, J. and Jeavons, P. Local Consistency and SAT-Solvers CP 2010 pp.398-413

Introduction The relationship between constraint satisfaction problems and boolean satisfiability problems has been an area of active research in the last decade CP solvers attempt to learn new constraints but the belief of the community has been that attempting to enforce stronger consistency (k-consistency) than generalized arc consistency is inefficient SAT solvers which rely primarily on resolution to produce refutations have shown remarkable

k-Consistency K-consistency extends arc consistency and path consistency to arbitrarily high levels of consistency A nearly-optimal algorithm KS for k-consistency for any k proposed in 1989 suggests that if k-consistency is used as a method of relaxing the problem its time complexity is O(n2(a + 1)n) where n is the number of variables and a is a number that relates the number of labelings by a constraint on the domain1 [1] Cooper, M. An Optimal k-Consistency Algorithm Artificial Intelligence 41 pp.89-95

Converting a CSP to a SAT problem Take a CSP of the form P = {V, D, C} Introduce a set of boolean variables of the form xvd for each v∈V with domain element d∈Dv Along the each independent domain, ensure that only one variable can be true for the clause to be satisfied. ∨d∈DvXvd , ¬xvi∨¬xvj for all i,j∈Dv Encode constraints as clauses of 2 or more boolean variables for each partial assignment that does not satisfy the constraint ∨v∈S¬xvf(v)

Resolution We can solve clauses by inference across some clauses of the form C1 ∨ x and C2 ∨ ¬x to produce a new clause (the resolvent) of the form C1 ∨ C2 If we have a collection of clauses of the form Ci ∨¬xi for i =1, 2,...,r, where each xi is a Boolean variable, and a purely positive clause x1 ∨ x2 ∨···∨ xr, then we can deduce the clause C1 ∨ C2 ∨···∨ Cr. They dubbed this form of inference positive-hyper-resolution and the resultant clause C1 ∨ C2 ∨···∨ Cr the positive-hyper-resolvent.

K-Consistency and Positive-Hyper-Resolution Theorem 1. The k-consistency closure of a CSP instance P is empty if and only if its direct encoding as a set of clauses has a positive-hyper-resolution refutation of width at most k. Lemma 1.1. Let P be a CSP instance, and let Φ be its direct encoding as a set of clauses. If Φ has no positive-hyper- resolution refutation of width k or less, then the k-consistency closure of P is non-empty. Lemma 1.2. Let P be a CSP instance, and let Φ be its direct encoding as a set of clauses. If the k-consistency closure of P is non-empty, then Φ has no positive-hyper-resolution refutation of width k or less.

Proof discussion ∨d∈DvXvd , ¬xvi∨¬xvj for all i, j∈Dv ∨v∈S¬xvf(v) C1VC2Vx1 ¬x1V¬x2 x2VC3VC4 C1VC2vC3VC4

Theorem 2. If a set of non-empty clauses Δ over n Boolean variables has a positive-hyper- resolution refutation of width k and length m, where all derived clauses contain only negative literals, then the expected number of restarts required by a standard randomised SAT-solver to discover that Δ is unsatisfiable is less than mnk(n on k).

Theorem 3. If a set of non-empty clauses Δ over n Boolean variables has a positive-hyper- resolution refutation of width k and length m, where all derived clauses contain only negative literals, then the expected number of restarts required by a standard randomised SAT-solver using the Decision learning scheme to discover that Δ is unsatisfiable is less than m(n on k).

Theorem 4. If the k-consistency closure of a CSP instance P is empty, then the expected number of restarts required by a standard randomised SAT-solver using the Decision learning scheme to discover that the direct encoding of P is unsatisfiable is O(n2kd2k), where n is the number of variables in P and d is the maximum domain size.

A problem with no solution n = ((d-1)*w + 2)*w over w groups d = {0..d-1} tree width = 2w - 1

On SAT solvers

Acknowledgements Thank you to Justyna Petke for allowing me to use her modified SAT solver Thank you to Peter for allowing me to use his laptop