Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Efficient Local Search SAT Solver with Effective Preprocessing for Structured Instances

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Developing an efficient solver for different NP-complete problems such as propositional satisfiability (SAT) is very complicated and often takes a lot of time. A wide range of problems in different areas of computer science and artificial intelligence can be solved using SAT solvers. The SAT problem is defined as finding a logical assignment that satisfies all clauses in a Boolean formula. The recent developments of different stochastic local search (SLS) SAT solvers present various new heuristics and solving strategies. In this paper, we present an SLS-based SAT solver for structured instances that includes an efficient preprocessing technique along with a few other heuristics. We first remove all equivalence from the SAT formula and then perform searching. Experimental outcomes depict that our new solver can solve some unsolved instances of the state-of-the-art solver; for other benchmarks, our new one also responded quickly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.satcompetition.org/.

  2. https://www.satcompetition.org/.

  3. https://www.cs.ubc.ca/hoos/SATLIB/benchm.html.

References

  1. Michel L, Van Hentenryck P. Localizer constraints. Set. 2000;5(1–2):43–844.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Sheeran M, Singh S, Staalmarck G. Checking safety properties using induction and a sat-solver. In: International conference on formal methods in computer-aided design. New York: Springer; 2000. p. 127–44.

  3. Smith A, Veneris A, Ali MF, Viglas A. Fault diagnosis and logic debugging using boolean satisfiability. IEEE Trans Computer-Aided Design Integrated Circuits Syst. 2005;24(10):1606–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Marques-Silva J, Practical applications of boolean satisfiability. In, . 9th international workshop on discrete event systems. IEEE. 2008;2008:74–80.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kautz HA, Selman B et al. Planning as satisfiability. In: ECAI, vol. 92, Citeseer; 1992. p. 359–63.

  6. Lynce I, Marques-Silva J. Efficient haplotype inference with boolean satisfiability. In: National conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI). AAAI Press; 2006.

  7. Mironov I, Zhang L. Applications of sat solvers to cryptanalysis of hash functions. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. New York: Springer; 2006. p. 102–15.

  8. Hoos HH, Stutzle T. Systematic vs. local search for SAT. In: Annual conference on artificial intelligence. New York: Springer; 1999. p. 289–93.

  9. Davis M, Logemann G, Loveland D. A machine program for theorem-proving. J Symbolic Logic. 1967;32(1):118. https://doi.org/10.2307/2271269.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Sinz C. Towards an optimal cnf encoding of Boolean cardinality constraints. In: International conference on principles and practice of constraint programming. Springer, 2005. p. 827–31.

  11. Brafman RI. A simplifier for propositional formulas with many binary clauses. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B (Cybernetics). 2004;34(1):52–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bacchus F, Winter J. Effective preprocessing with hyper-resolution and equality reduction. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. Springer, 2003. p. 341–355.

  13. Een N, Biere A. Effective preprocessing in sat through variable and clause elimination. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 61–75.

  14. Cai S, Luo C, Su K. Ccanr: a configuration checking based local search solver for non-random satisfiability. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. New York: Springer; 2015. p. 1–8.

  15. Roy JA, Markov IL, Bertacco V. Restoring circuit structure from sat instances. In: Proceedings of international workshop on Logic and synthesis. Citeseer; 2004. p. 663–78.

  16. Ostrowski R, Gregoire E, Mazure B, Sais L. Recovering and exploiting structural knowledge from cnf formulas. In: International conference on principles and practice of constraint programming. New York: Springer; 2002. p. 185–99.

  17. Audemard G, Simon L. Predicting learnt clauses quality in modern sat solvers. In: Twenty-first international joint conference on artificial intelligence; 2009a.

  18. Audemard G, Simon L. Glucose: a solver that predicts learnt clauses quality. SAT Competition; 2009b. p. 7–8.

  19. Heule MJH, Kullmann O, Wieringa S, Biere A. Cube and conquer: Guiding cdcl sat solvers by lookaheads. In: Haifa Verification Conference. New York: Springer; 2011. p. 50—65.

  20. Sorensson N, Een N. Minisat v113-a sat solver with conflict-clause minimization. SAT. 2005;2005(53):1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Li CM, Huang WQ. Diversification and determinism in local search for satisfiability. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 158–72.

  22. Selman B, Levesque HJ, Mitchell DG et al. A new method for solving hard satisfiability problems. In: AAAI, volume 92, Citeseer; 1992. p. 440–6.

  23. Gent IP, Walsh T. Towards an understanding of hill-climbing procedures for SAT. In: AAAI, volume 93. Citeseer, 1993. p. 28–33.

  24. Benoist T, Estellon B, Gardi F, Megel R, Nouioua K. Localsolver 1x: a black-box local-search solver for 0–1 programming. For. 2011;9(3):299.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Cai S, Su K. Configuration checking with aspiration in local search for SAT. In: AAAI; 2012.

  26. Ashiqur RK, Lin X, Holger HH, Kevin L-B. Automatically building local search sat solvers from components. Artif Intell. 2016;232:20–42.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Selman B, Kautz HA, Cohen B. Noise strategies for improving local search. In: AAAI, volume 94; 1994. p. 337–43

  28. McAllester D, Selman B, Kautz H. Evidence for invariants in local search. In: AAAI/IAAI, pp 321–326. Rhode Island, USA, 1997.

  29. Heule M, Van Maaren H. Aligning cnf-and equivalence-reasoning. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. Springer, 2004. p. 145–56.

  30. Subbarayan S, Pradhan DK. Niver: Non-increasing variable elimination resolution for preprocessing sat instances. In: International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing. New York: Springer; 2004. p. 276–91.

  31. Gent IP, Walsh T. Unsatisfied variables in local search. Hybrid problems, hybrid solutions. 1995. p. 73–85.

  32. Michiels W, Aarts E, Korst J. Theoretical aspects of local search. New York: Springer; 2007.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Al-Sultan KS. A tabu search approach to the clustering problem. Pattern Recognit. 1995;28(9):1443–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Polash MM, Newton MA, Sattar A. Constraint-based local search for golomb rulers. In: International Conference on AI and OR Techniques in Constriant Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems. New York: Springer; 2015. p. 322–31.

  35. Cai S, Kaile S, Sattar A. Local search with edge weighting and configuration checking heuristics for minimum vertex cover. Artif Intell. 2011;175(9–10):1672–96.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Cai S, Kaile S. Local search for boolean satisfiability with configuration checking and subscore. Artif Intell. 2013;204:75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hossen MS, Polash MM. Implementing an efficient sat solver for structured instances. In: 2019 Joint 8th International Conference on Informatics, Electronics \& Vision (ICIEV) and 2019 3rd International Conference on Imaging, Vision \& Pattern Recognition (icIVPR). IEEE; 2019. p. 238–242.

  38. Balint A, Frohlich A. Improving stochastic local search for SAT with a new probability distribution. In: International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 10–5.

  39. Li CM, Li Y. Satisfying versus falsifying in local search for satisfiability. In: International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing. Springer, 2012. p. 477–478.

  40. Glover F, Marti R. Fundamentals of scatter search and path relinking 681 scheduling rules. In: Carnegie Mellon University; 1963.

  41. Resende MGC, Ribeiro CC. Grasp with path-relinking: Recent advances and applications. In: Metaheuristics: progress as real problem solvers. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 29–63.

  42. Festa P, Pardalos M, Pitsoulis S, Resende GC. Grasp with path relinking for the weighted maxsat problem. J Exp Algorithmics (JEA). 2007;11:2–4.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Festa P, Resende MGC. Hybridizations of grasp with path-relinking. In: Hybrid metaheuristics. New York: Springer; 2013. p. 135–55.

  44. Zhenxing X, He K, Li C-M. An iterative path-breaking approach with mutation and restart strategies for the max-sat problem. Comput Operations Res. 2019;104:49–58.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Jarvis P, Arbelaez A. Cooperative parallel sat local search with path relinking. In: European Conference on Evolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization (Part of EvoStar). New York: Springer; 2020. p. 83–98.

  46. Van Laarhoven PJM, Aarts EHL. Simulated annealing. In: Simulated annealing: theory and applications. New York: Springer; 1987. p. 7–15.

  47. Prestwich S. Random walk with continuously smoothed variable weights. In: International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 203–215.

  48. Selman B, Kautz HA. An empirical study of greedy local search for satisfiability testing. In: AAAI, volume 93; 1993. p. 46–51.

  49. Metropolis N, Ulam S. The monte carlo method. J Am Stat Association. 1949;44(247):335–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to the Information and Communication Technology Division of the Government of People’s Republic Bangladesh for student fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Jagannath University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

    Md Shibbir Hossen

  2. School of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Md Masbaul Alam Polash

Authors
  1. Md Shibbir Hossen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Md Masbaul Alam Polash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md Shibbir Hossen.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hossen, M.S., Polash, M.M.A. An Efficient Local Search SAT Solver with Effective Preprocessing for Structured Instances. SN COMPUT. SCI. 2, 105 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00476-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00476-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation