User:Tamkin04iut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conflict Driven Clause Learning[edit]

Now a days Boolean Satisfiability (SAT) solvers are much effective in practical applications include AI planning, Bioinformatics, Software test pattern generation, Software package dependencies, Hardware and Software model checking, and cryptography. The Boolean Satisfiability problem (SAT) is one of the most studied NP-Complete problems because of its significance in both theoretical research and practical applications. Given a Boolean formula, the SAT problem asks for an assignment of variables so that the entire formula evaluates to true. Modern SAT solvers are really fast, one of the main reason is that state-of-the-art SAT solvers uses Conflict-Driven Clause Learning (CDCL) inside of it. CDCL SAT solvers have been applied in many cases with remarkable success.

The inside organization of CDCL SAT solvers is primarily inspired by DPLL solvers (See DPLL algorithm for more details). Conflict Driven Clause Learning was proposed by:

  • J. P. Marques-Silva and Karem A. Sakallah, in their paper “GRASP: A Search Algorithm for Propositional Satisfiability”. and
  • R. J. Bayardo Jr. and R. C. Schrag, in their paper “Using CSP look-back techniques to solve real world SAT instances.”

Algorithm[edit]

To have a clear idea about the CDCL algorithm we must have background knowledge about:

# SAT (Satisfiability).
# Unit clause rule (unit propagation). 
# Boolean constraint propagation (BCP).
# Resolution
# DP Algorithm.
# DPLL algorithm

Background[edit]

SAT (Satisfiability):[edit]

Satisfiability problem - Given a CNF formula, find satisfying assignment to a propositional logic (CNF) formula.

The following formulas is in CNF:

where A,C,B = variables or literals. Both and are clauses, = negation of A

where A,C,B = variables or literals. Both and are clauses. = negation of A

If we provide this CNF formula to any SAT solvers than one solution for this formula could be:

If we just apply brute force search to find out satisfiabilty assignment, as there are 3 (A,B,C) variables and there are 2 possible values (0 or 1) for each variables then we have possibilities. Surely we can apply brute force algorithm. But if we have million of variables and clauses then we can't apply brute force search. The responsibility of a SAT solver is to find a satisfying assignment efficiently and quickly applying different heuristics from complex CNF formula.

Unit clause rule (unit propagation):[edit]

If an unsatisfied clause has all but one of its literals or variables evaluate to 0 (False), then free literals must be implied to be 1 (True). For example, if the below unsatisfied clause is evaluated with

then must be
Boolean constraint propagation (BCP):[edit]

The iterated application of the unit clause rule is referred to as unit propagation or Boolean constraint propagation (BCP).

Resolution:[edit]

Consider two clause and and applying resolution refutation we get ,
by cancelling out and .

DP Algorithm:[edit]

Davis, Putnam (1960) had developed this algorithm. Property of this algorithms are:

  • Iteratively select variable for resolution till no more variable are left.
  • Can discard all original clauses after each iteration.

See more details here DP Algorithm

Resolution of caluses
Resolution of caluses
DPLL Algorithm:[edit]

Davis, Putnam, Logemann, Loveland (1962) had developed this algorithm. Property of this algorithms are:

  • It is based on search.
  • Most successful and the basis for all most all modern SAT solvers.
  • It uses learning and chronological back tracking (1996).

See more details here DPLL algorithm. An example with visualization of DPLL algorithm having chronological back tracking:

CDCL (Conflict Driven Clause Learning)[edit]

The main difference of CDCL and DPLL is that CDCL's back jumping is non - chronological.

Conflict Driven Clause Learning works as follows.

  1. Select a variable and assign 0 or 1. This is called decision state. Remember the assignment.
  2. Apply Boolean constraint propagation (Unit propagation).
  3. Build the implication graph.
  4. If there is any conflict then analysis the conflict and non - chronologically backtrack to appropriate decision level.
  5. Otherwise continue from step 1 until all variable values are assigned.

Example[edit]

A visual example of CDCL algorithm:

Pseudocode[edit]

algorithm CDCL (cnfFormula,variables):
    if (UnitPropagation(cnfFormula,variables) == CONFLICT):
         return UNSAT
    else:
         decisionLevel = 0 #Decision level
         while (not AllVariablesAssigned(cnfFormula,variables)):
              (variable, val) = PickBranchingVariable(cnfFormula,variables) #Decide stage
              decisionLevel += 1 #Increment decision level due to new decision
              insert (variable, val) in variables
              if (UnitPropagation(cnfFormula,variables) == CONFLICT):
                 backtrackLevel = ConflictAnalysis(cnfFormula,variables)
                 if( backtrackLevel < 0):
                    return UNSAT
                 else:
                    Backtrack(cnfFormula,variables,backtrackLevel)
                    decisionLevel  = backtrackLevel  #Decrement decision level due to backtracking
         return SAT

In addition to the main CDCL function, the following auxiliary functions are used:

  • UnitPropagation: consists of the iterated application of the unit clause rule. If an unsatisfied clause is identified, then a conflict indication is returned.
  • PickBranchingVariable: consists of selecting a variable to assign and the respective value.
  • ConflictAnalysis consists of analyzing the most recent conflict and learning a new clause from the conflict. The organization of this procedure is described in section 4.4.
  • Backtrack backtracks: to the decision level computed by Conflict- Analysis.
  • AllVariablesAssigned: tests whether all variables have been assigned, in which case the algorithm terminates indicating that the CNF formula is satisfiable. An alternative criterion to stop execution of the algorithm is to check whether all clauses are satisfied. However, in modern SAT solvers that use lazy data structures, clause state cannot be maintained accurately, and so the termination criterion must be whether all variables are assigned.

Completeness[edit]

DPLL is a sound and complete algorithm for SAT. CDCL SAT solvers implement DPLL, but can learn new clauses and backtrack non chronologically. Clause learning with conflict analysis does not affect soundness or completeness. Conflict analysis identifies new clauses using the resolution operation. Therefore each learnt clause can be inferred from the original clauses and other learnt clauses by a sequence of resolution steps. If cN is the new learnt clause, then ϕ is satisfiable if and only if ϕ ∪ {cN} is also satisfiable. Moreover, the modified backtracking step also does not affect soundness or completeness, since backtracking information is obtained from each new learnt clause.

Applications[edit]

The main application of CDCL algorithm is in different SAT solver including

  • MiniSAT
  • Zchaff SAT
  • Z3
  • ManySAT etc.

CDCL algorithm has made SAT solvers so powerful that these solvers are being used in several real world application area like - AI planning, Bioinformatics, Software test pattern generation, Software package dependencies, Hardware and Software model checking, and cryptography.

Related algorithms[edit]

Related algorithm to CDCL are the DP and DPLL algorithm described before. DP algorithm uses resolution refutation and it has potential memory access problem. Where as DPLL algorithm is OK for randomly generated instances but bad for instances generated in practical application. We have better approach CDCL to solve such problems. Applying CDCL provides less state space search in compare to DPLL.

References[edit]

  1. M. Davis, H. Putnam. A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory. J. ACM 7(3): 201-215 (1960)
  2. M. Davis, G. Logemann, D.W. Loveland. A machine program for theorem-proving. Commun. ACM 5(7): 394-397 (1962)
  3. M.W. Moskewicz, C. F. Madigan, Y. Zhao, L. Zhang, S. Malik. Chaff: Engineering an Efficient SAT Solver. DAC 2001: 530-535
  4. J. P. Marques-Silva and Karem A. Sakallah, “GRASP: A Search Algorithm for Propositional Satisfiability”, IEEE Trans. Computers, C-48, 5:506-521,1999.
  5. R. J. Bayardo Jr. and R. C. Schrag “Using CSP look-back techniques to solve real world SAT instances.” Proc. AAAI, pp. 203-208, 1997.
  6. L. Zhang, C. F. Madigan, M.W. Moskewicz, S. Malik. Efficient Conflict Driven Learning in Boolean Satisfiability Solver. ICCAD 2001: 279-285
  7. Handbook of Satisfiability Armin Biere, Marijn Heule, Hans van Maaren and Toby Walsch IOS Press, 2008.
  8. Presentation - "SAT-Solving: From Davis-Putnam to Zchaff and Beyond" by Lintao Zhang. (Several pictures are taken from his presentation)

Other material[edit]

Beside CDCL there are other approaches which are used to speed up SAT solvers. Some of them are -