Resolution Proofs and Skolem Functions in QBF Evaluation and Applications

Quantified Boolean formulae (QBF) allow compact encoding of many decision problems. Their importance motivated the development of fast QBF solvers. Certifying the results of a QBF solver not only ensures correctness, but also enables certain synthesis and verification tasks particularly when the certificate is given as a set of Skolem functions. To date the certificate of a true formula can be in the form of either a (cube) resolution proof or a Skolem-function model whereas that of a false formula is in the form of a (clause) resolution proof. The resolution proof and Skolem-function model are somewhat unrelated. This paper strengthens their connection by showing that, given a true QBF, its Skolem-function model is derivable from its cube-resolution proof of satisfiability as well as from its clause-resolution proof of unsatisfiability under formula negation. Consequently Skolem-function derivation can be decoupled from Skolemization-based solvers and computed from standard search-based ones. Fundamentally different from prior methods, our derivation in essence constructs Skolem functions following the variable quantification order. It permits constructing a subset of Skolem functions of interests rather than the whole, and is particularly desirable in many applications. Experimental results show the robust scalability and strong benefits of the new method.

[1]  Jussi Rintanen,et al.  Constructing Conditional Plans by a Theorem-Prover , 1999, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[2]  Niklas Sörensson,et al.  An Extensible SAT-solver , 2003, SAT.

[3]  Roderick Bloem,et al.  Fault Localization and Correction with QBF , 2007, SAT.

[4]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  Resolution for Quantified Boolean Formulas , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[5]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Computational complexity , 1993 .

[6]  Nachum Dershowitz,et al.  Bounded Model Checking with QBF , 2005, SAT.

[7]  Daniel Kroening,et al.  A First Step Towards a Unified Proof Checker for QBF , 2007, SAT.

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

[9]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Validating the result of a quantified Boolean formula (QBF) solver: theory and practice , 2005, Proceedings of the ASP-DAC 2005. Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference, 2005..

[10]  G. S. Tseitin On the Complexity of Derivation in Propositional Calculus , 1983 .

[11]  Joao Marques-Silva,et al.  Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing - SAT 2007, 10th International Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, May 28-31, 2007, Proceedings , 2007, SAT.

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

[13]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  Clause/Term Resolution and Learning in the Evaluation of Quantified Boolean Formulas , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[14]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Conflict driven learning in a quantified Boolean satisfiability solver , 2002, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design, 2002. ICCAD 2002..

[15]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  An Algorithm to Evaluate Quantified Boolean Formulae and Its Experimental Evaluation , 2002, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[16]  Sanjit A. Seshia,et al.  Combinatorial sketching for finite programs , 2006, ASPLOS XII.

[17]  Tsutomu Sasao,et al.  Logic Synthesis and Verification , 2013 .

[18]  Amir Pnueli,et al.  Automatic Hardware Synthesis from Specifications: A Case Study , 2007 .

[19]  Jie-Hong Roland Jiang,et al.  Interpolating functions from large Boolean relations , 2009, 2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design - Digest of Technical Papers.

[20]  Luca Pulina,et al.  Evaluating and certifying QBFs: A comparison of state-of-the-art tools , 2009, AI Commun..

[21]  Marco Benedetti Extracting Certificates from Quantified Boolean Formulas , 2005, IJCAI.