On Subsumption Removal and On-the-Fly CNF Simplification

CNF Boolean formulas generated from resolution or solution enumeration often have much redundancy. Efficient algorithms are needed to simplify and compact such CNF formulas. In this paper, we present a novel algorithm to maintain a subsumption-free CNF clause database by efficiently detecting and removing subsumption as the clauses are being added. We then present an algorithm that compact CNF formula further by applying resolutions to make it Decremental Resolution Free. Our experimental evaluations show that these algorithms are efficient and effective in practice.

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

[2]  Shin-ichi Minato,et al.  Zero-Suppressed BDDs for Set Manipulation in Combinatorial Problems , 1993, 30th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[3]  E. Clarke,et al.  Using SAT based image computation for reachability analysis , 2003 .

[4]  Dhiraj K. Pradhan,et al.  NiVER: Non Increasing Variable Elimination Resolution for Preprocessing SAT instances , 2004, SAT.

[5]  Randal E. Bryant,et al.  Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[6]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Towards a Symmetric Treatment of Satisfaction and Conflicts in Quantified Boolean Formula Evaluation , 2002, CP.

[7]  Fabio Somenzi,et al.  Logic synthesis and verification algorithms , 1996 .

[8]  R. Bryant.  Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation12 , 1986 .

[9]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  Applying SAT Methods in Unbounded Symbolic Model Checking , 2002, CAV.

[10]  Sharad Malik,et al.  The Quest for Efficient Boolean Satisfiability Solvers , 2002, CAV.

[11]  Philippe Chatalic,et al.  Multi-resolution on compressed sets of clauses , 2000, Proceedings 12th IEEE Internationals Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence. ICTAI 2000.

[12]  Hantao Zhang,et al.  SATO: An Efficient Propositional Prover , 1997, CADE.

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

[14]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  An Algorithm to Evaluate Quantified Boolean Formulae , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[15]  Nicolas Barnier,et al.  Solving the Kirkman's schoolgirl problem in a few seconds , 2002 .

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

[17]  S. Malik,et al.  Towards symmetric treatment of con?icts and satisfaction in quanti-fied Boolean satisfiability solv , 2002 .

[18]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  On the efficiency of subsumption algorithms , 1985, JACM.

[19]  Matthew W. Moskewicz,et al.  Engineering a (super?) efficient sat solver , 2001, Design Automation Conference.

[20]  Andrei Voronkov.  Implementing Bottom-up Procedures with Code Trees: a Case Study of Forward Subsumption , 1995 .

[21]  Johan de Kleer.  An Improved Incremental Algorithm for Generating Prime Implicates , 1992, AAAI.

[22]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  QUBE: A System for Deciding Quantified Boolean Formulas Satisfiability , 2001, IJCAR.

[23]  Armin Biere,et al.  Resolve and Expand , 2004, SAT.

[24]  Donald Loveland.  A Machine Program for Theorem-Provingt , 2000 .

[25]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Towards a symmetric treatment of satisfaction and conflicts in QBF , 2002 .

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

[27]  Joao Marques-Silva,et al.  GRASP: A Search Algorithm for Propositional Satisfiability , 1999, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[28]  In-Cheol Park,et al.  SAT-based unbounded symbolic model checking , 2003, Proceedings 2003. Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37451).

[29]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).