More Like this

1. Generating Extended Resolution Proofs with a BDD-Based SAT Solver

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72016-2_5  

   Bryant, Randal E.; Heule, Marijn J. (January 2021, Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems)

   Groote, J. F.; Larsen, K. G. (Ed.)

   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. Such proofs indicate 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 obtain polynomially sized proofs on benchmarks for the mutilated chessboard and pigeonhole problems—ones that are very challenging for search-based SAT solvers. 

   more » « less
2. Preprocessing of Propagation Redundant Clauses

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10769-6_8  

   Reeves, Joseph E.; Bryant, Randal E.; Heule, Marijn J. (August 2022, Lecture notes in computer science)

   Blanchette, Jasmin; Kovacs, Laura; Pattinson, Dirk (Ed.)

   The propagation redundant (PR) proof system generalizes the resolution and resolution asymmetric tautology proof systems used by conflict-driven clause learning (CDCL) solvers. PR allows short proofs of unsatisfiability for some problems that are difficult for CDCL solvers. Previous attempts to automate PR clause learning used hand-crafted heuristics that work well on some highly-structured problems. For example, the solver SaDiCaL incorporates PR clause learning into the CDCL loop, but it cannot compete with modern CDCL solvers due to its fragile heuristics. We present prExtract, a preprocessing technique that learns short PR clauses. Adding these clauses to a formula reduces the search space that the solver must explore. By performing PR clause learning as a preprocessing stage, PR clauses can be found efficiently without sacrificing the robustness of modern CDCL solvers. On a large portion of SAT competition benchmarks we found that preprocessing with prExtract improves solver performance. In addition, there were several satisfiable and unsatisfiable formulas that could only be solved after preprocessing with prExtract. prExtract supports proof logging, giving a high level of confidence in the results. 

   more » « less
3. Benchmarking the Capabilities and Limitations of SAT Solvers in Defeating Obfuscation Schemes

   https://doi.org/10.1109/IOLTS.2018.8474189  

   Roshanisefat, Shervin; Thirumala, Harshith K.; Gaj, Kris; Homayoun, Houman; Sasan, Avesta (July 2018, 2018 IEEE 24th International Symposium on On-Line Testing And Robust System Design (IOLTS))

   In this paper, we investigate the strength of six different SAT solvers in attacking various obfuscation schemes. Our investigation revealed that Glucose and Lingeling SAT solvers are generally suited for attacking small-to-midsize obfuscated circuits, while the MapleGlucose, if the system is not memory bound, is best suited for attacking mid-to-difficult obfuscation methods. Our experimental result indicates that when dealing with extremely large circuits and very difficult oufuscation problems, the SAT solver may be memory bound, and Lingeling, for having the most memory efficient implementation, is the best suited solver for such problems. Additionally, our investigation revealed that SAT solver execution times may vary widely across different SAT solvers. Hence, when testing the hardness of an obfuscation methods, although the increase in difficulty could be verified by one SAT solver, the pace of increase in difficulty is dependent on the choice of a SAT solver. 

   more » « less
4. Generating Extended Resolution Proofs with a BDD-Based SAT Solver

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3595295  

   Bryant, Randal E.; Heule, Marijn J. (October 2023, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic)

   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. 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 BDD-based solver, implemented by extending an existing BDD package, to several challenging Boolean satisfiability problems. Our results demonstrate scaling for parity formulas as well as the Urquhart, mutilated chessboard, and pigeonhole problems far beyond that of other proof-generating SAT solvers. 

   more » « less
5. Clausal Proofs for Pseudo-Boolean Reasoning

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99524-9_25  

   Bryant, Randal E.; Heule, Marijn J. (January 2022, International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems)

   Fisman, D.; Rosu, G. (Ed.)

   When augmented with a Pseudo-Boolean (PB) solver, a Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solver can apply apply powerful reasoning methods to determine when a set of parity or cardinality constraints, extracted from the clauses of the input formula, has no solution. By converting the intermediate constraints generated by the PB solver into ordered binary decision diagrams (BDDs), a proof-generating, BDD-based SAT solver can then produce a clausal proof that the input formula is unsatisfiable. Working together, the two solvers can generate proofs of unsatisfiability for problems that are intractable for other proof-generating SAT solvers. The PB solver can, at times, detect that the proof can exploit modular arithmetic to give smaller BDD representations and therefore shorter proofs. 

   more » « less