Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userRelating Complexity-theoretic Parameters with SAT Solver Performance
92
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Edward Zulkoski
Publication date
2017
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Over the years complexity theorists have proposed many structural parameters to explain the surprising efficiency of conflict-driven clause-learning (CDCL) SAT solvers on a wide variety of large industrial Boolean instances. While some of these parameters have been studied empirically, until now there has not been a unified comparative study of their explanatory power on a comprehensive benchmark. We correct this state of affairs by conducting a large-scale empirical evaluation of CDCL SAT solver performance on nearly 7000 industrial and crafted formulas against several structural parameters such as backdoors, treewidth, backbones, and community structure. Our study led us to several results. First, we show that while such parameters only weakly correlate with CDCL solving time, certain combinations of them yield much better regression models. Second, we show how some parameters can be used as a lens to better understand the efficiency of different solving heuristics. Finally, we propose a new complexity-theoretic parameter, which we call learning-sensitive with restarts (LSR) backdoors, that extends the notion of learning-sensitive (LS) backdoors to incorporate restarts and discuss algorithms to compute them. We mathematically prove that for certain class of instances minimal LSR-backdoors are exponentially smaller than minimal-LS backdoors.
rate research
Read More
We propose a new approach to SAT solving which solves SAT problems in vector spaces as a cost minimization problem of a non-negative differentiable cost function J^sat. In our approach, a solution, i.e., satisfying assignment, for a SAT problem in n variables is represented by a binary vector u in {0,1}^n that makes J^sat(u) zero. We search for such u in a vector space R^n by cost minimization, i.e., starting from an initial u_0 and minimizing J to zero while iteratively updating u by Newtons method. We implemented our approach as a matrix-based differential SAT solver MatSat. Although existing main-stream SAT solvers decide each bit of a solution assignment one by one, be they of conflict driven clause learning (CDCL) type or of stochastic local search (SLS) type, MatSat fundamentally differs from them in that it continuously approach a solution in a vector space. We conducted an experiment to measure the scalability of MatSat with random 3-SAT problems in which MatSat could find a solution up to n=10^5 variables. We also compared MatSat with four state-of-the-art SAT solvers including winners of SAT competition 2018 and SAT Race 2019 in terms of time for finding a solution, using a random benchmark set from SAT 2018 competition and an artificial random 3-SAT instance set. The result shows that MatSat comes in second in both test sets and outperforms all the CDCL type solvers.
Restarts are a widely-used class of techniques integral to the efficiency of Conflict-Driven Clause Learning (CDCL) Boolean SAT solvers. While the utility of such policies has been well-established empirically, a theoretical explanation of whether restarts are indeed crucial to the power of CDCL solvers is lacking. In this paper, we prove a series of theoretical results that characterize the power of restarts for various models of SAT solvers. More precisely, we make the following contributions. First, we prove an exponential separation between a {it drunk} randomized CDCL solver model with restarts and the same model without restarts using a family of satisfiable instances. Second, we show that the configuration of CDCL solver with VSIDS branching and restarts (with activities erased after restarts) is exponentially more powerful than the same configuration without restarts for a family of unsatisfiable instances. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first separation results involving restarts in the context of SAT solvers. Third, we show that restarts do not add any proof complexity-theoretic power vis-a-vis a number of models of CDCL and DPLL solvers with non-deterministic static variable and value selection.
We introduce a continuous-time analog solver for MaxSAT, a quintessential class of NP-hard discrete optimization problems, where the task is to find a truth assignment for a set of Boolean variables satisfying the maximum number of given logical constraints. We show that the scaling of an invariant of the solvers dynamics, the escape rate, as function of the number of unsatisfied clauses can predict the global optimum value, often well before reaching the corresponding state. We demonstrate the performance of the solver on hard MaxSAT competition problems. We then consider the two-color Ramsey number $R(m,m)$ problem, translate it to SAT, and apply our algorithm to the still unknown $R(5,5)$. We find edge colorings without monochromatic 5-cliques for complete graphs up to 42 vertices, while on 43 vertices we find colorings with only two monochromatic 5-cliques, the best coloring found so far, supporting the conjecture that $R(5,5) = 43$.
In 2006, Biere, Jussila, and Sinz made the key observation that the underlying logic behind algorithms for constructing Reduced, Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs) can be encoded as steps in a proof in the extended resolution logical framework. Through this, a BDD-based Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solver can generate a checkable proof of unsatisfiability for a set of clauses. Such a proof indicates that the formula is truly unsatisfiable without requiring the user to trust the BDD package or the SAT solver built on top of it. We extend their work to enable arbitrary existential quantification of the formula variables, a critical capability for BDD-based SAT solvers. We demonstrate the utility of this approach by applying a prototype solver to several problems that are very challenging for search-based SAT solvers, obtaining polynomially sized proofs on benchmarks for parity formulas, as well as the Urquhart, mutilated chessboard, and pigeonhole problems.
We compare the impact of hardware advancement and algorithm advancement for SAT solving over the last two decades. In particular, we compare 20-year-old SAT-solvers on new computer hardware with modern SAT-solvers on 20-year-old hardware. Our findings show that the progress on the algorithmic side has at least as much impact as the progress on the hardware side.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
