On Computing Minimum Unsatisfiable Cores

Certifying a SAT solver for unsatisfiable instances is a computationally hard problem. Nevertheless, in the utilization of SAT in industrial settings, one often needs to be able to generate unsatisfiability proofs, either to guarantee the correctness of the SAT solver or as part of the utilization of SAT in some applications (e.g. in model checking). As part of the process of generating unsatisfiable proofs, one is also interested in unsatisfiable subformulas of the original formula, also known as unsatisfiable cores. Furthermore, it may by useful identifying theminimum unsatisfiable core of a given problem instance, i.e. the smallest number of clauses that make the instance unsatisfiable. This approach is be very useful in AI problems where identifying the minimum core is crucial for correcting the minimum amount of inconsistent information (e.g. in knowledge bases).

[1]  Roberto J. Bayardo,et al.  Using CSP Look-Back Techniques to Solve Real-World SAT Instances , 1997, AAAI/IAAI.

[2]  Ulrich Junker.  Conflict Detection for Arbitrary Constraint Propagation Algorithms , 2001 .

[3]  Joao Marques-Silva,et al.  GRASP-A new search algorithm for satisfiability , 1996, Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided Design.

[4]  Yuichi Asahiro,et al.  Random generation of test instances with controlled attributes , 1993, Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability.

[5]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  Interpolation and SAT-Based Model Checking , 2003, CAV.

[6]  Antonio Sassano,et al.  Restoring Satisfiability or Maintaining Unsatisfiability by finding small Unsatisfiable Subformulae , 2001, Electron. Notes Discret. Math..

[7]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  An efficient algorithm for the minimal unsatisfiability problem for a subclass of CNF , 1998, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  Automatic Abstraction without Counterexamples , 2003, TACAS.

[9]  Eugene Goldberg,et al.  Verification of proofs of unsatisfiability for CNF formulas , 2003, 2003 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition.

[10]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  The Complexity of Facets Resolved , 1988, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[11]  Peter C. Cheeseman,et al.  Where the Really Hard Problems Are , 1991, IJCAI.

[12]  Igor L. Markov,et al.  AMUSE: a minimally-unsatisfiable subformula extractor , 2004, Proceedings. 41st Design Automation Conference, 2004..

[13]  Stefan Szeider,et al.  Polynomial-time recognition of minimal unsatisfiable formulas with fixed clause-variable difference , 2002, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Eugene Goldberg,et al.  BerkMin: A Fast and Robust Sat-Solver , 2002, Discret. Appl. Math..

[15]  Lakhdar Sais,et al.  Boosting complete techniques thanks to local search methods , 1998, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[16]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  A machine program for theorem-proving , 2011, CACM.

[17]  Karem A. Sakallah,et al.  GRASP—a new search algorithm for satisfiability , 1996, ICCAD 1996.

[18]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[19]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  On subclasses of minimal unsatisfiable formulas , 2000, Discret. Appl. Math..

[20]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Validating SAT solvers using an independent resolution-based checker: practical implementations and other applications , 2003, 2003 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition.