skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Editors contains: "Rümmer, Philipp"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Narodytska, Nina; Rümmer, Philipp (Ed.)
    Clausal proofs, particularly those based on the deletion resolution asymmetric tautology (DRAT) proof system, are widely used by Boolean satisfiability solvers for expressing proofs of unsatisfiability. Their success stems from their simplicity and scalability. When solvers go beyond pure propositional reasoning, however, generating clausal proofs becomes more difficult. Solvers that employ pseudo-Boolean reasoning, including cutting-planes operations, can express proofs in the VeriPB proof system, but its adoption is not widespread. We introduce PBIP (Pseudo-Boolean Implication Proof), a framework that provides an intermediate representation between VeriPB and clausal proofs. We also introduce a toolchain comprising 1) a VeriPB-to-PBIP translator that performs proof trimming and optimization, and 2) a PBIP-to-LRAT translator that makes use of proof-generating operations on ordered binary decision diagrams (BDDs) to generate clausal proofs in LRAT format, a variant of the DRAT that allows efficient checking. We demonstrate the viability of our approach, the effectiveness of our trimming, and the performance of our clausal proof generator on a set of native PB benchmarks and compare our approach to direct checking of VeriPB proofs. 
    more » « less