Fast DQBF Refutation

Dependency Quantified Boolean Formulas (DQBF) extend QBF with Henkin quantifiers, which allow for non-linear dependencies between the quantified variables. This extension is useful in verification problems for incomplete designs, such as the partial equivalence checking (PEC) problem, where a partial circuit, with some parts left open as “black boxes”, is compared against a full circuit. The PEC problem is to decide whether the black boxes in the partial circuit can be filled in such a way that the two circuits become equivalent, while respecting that each black box only observes the subset of the signals that are designated as its input. We present a new algorithm that efficiently refutes unsatisfiable DQBF formulas. The algorithm detects situations in which already a subset of the possible assignments of the universally quantified variables suffices to rule out a satisfying assignment of the existentially quantified variables. Our experimental evaluation on PEC benchmarks shows that the new algorithm is a significant improvement both over approximative QBF-based methods, where our results are much more accurate, and over precise methods based on variable elimination, where the new algorithm scales better in the number of Henkin quantifiers.

[1]  Armin Biere,et al.  DepQBF: A Dependency-Aware QBF Solver , 2010, J. Satisf. Boolean Model. Comput..

[2]  John H. Reif,et al.  Multiple-person alternation , 1979, 20th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1979).

[3]  Armin Biere,et al.  Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing - SAT 2006, 9th International Conference, Seattle, WA, USA, August 12-15, 2006, Proceedings , 2006, SAT.

[4]  Jie-Hong Roland Jiang,et al.  Unified QBF certification and its applications , 2012, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[5]  Orna Kupfermant,et al.  Synthesis with Incomplete Informatio , 2000 .

[6]  Mikolás Janota,et al.  On Propositional QBF Expansions and Q-Resolution , 2013, SAT.

[7]  Bernd Becker,et al.  Computation of minimal counterexamples by using black box techniques and symbolic methods , 2007, ICCAD 2007.

[8]  Marco Benedetti,et al.  Evaluating QBFs via Symbolic Skolemization , 2005, LPAR.

[9]  Matti Järvisalo,et al.  Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2013 , 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Bernd Becker,et al.  Equivalence checking of partial designs using dependency quantified Boolean formulae , 2013, 2013 IEEE 31st International Conference on Computer Design (ICCD).

[11]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Monodic fragments of first-order temporal logics: 2000-2001 A.D , 2001, LPAR.

[12]  Jie-Hong Roland Jiang,et al.  Henkin Quantifiers and Boolean Formulae , 2012, SAT.

[13]  Armin Biere,et al.  A DPLL Algorithm for Solving DQBF , 2012 .

[14]  Bernd Finkbeiner,et al.  Detecting Unrealizable Specifications of Distributed Systems , 2014, TACAS.

[15]  Armin Biere,et al.  Blocked Clause Elimination for QBF , 2011, CADE.

[16]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  Dependency Quantified Horn Formulas: Models and Complexity , 2006, SAT.

[17]  William J. Dally,et al.  Digital Design: A Systems Approach , 2012 .

[18]  Bernd Finkbeiner,et al.  Uniform distributed synthesis , 2005, 20th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS' 05).

[19]  Alessandro Cimatti,et al.  Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2012 , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[20]  Bernd Becker,et al.  Checking equivalence for partial implementations , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).

[21]  Nikolaj Bjørner,et al.  Automated Deduction - CADE-23 - 23rd International Conference on Automated Deduction, Wroclaw, Poland, July 31 - August 5, 2011. Proceedings , 2011, CADE.