Advertisement

Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 55, Issue 1, pp 61–90 | Cite as

The 2013 Evaluation of SMT-COMP and SMT-LIB

  • David R. CokEmail author
  • Aaron Stump
  • Tjark Weber
Article

Abstract

After 8 years of SMT Competitions, the SMT Steering Committee decided, for 2013, to sponsor an evaluation of the status of SMT benchmarks and solvers, rather than another competition. This report summarizes the results of the evaluation, conducted by the authors. The key observations are that (1) the competition results are quite sensitive to randomness and (2) the most significant need for the future is assessment and improvement of benchmarks in the light of SMT applications. The evaluation also measured competitiveness of solvers, general coverage of solvers, logics, and benchmarks, and degree of repeatability of measurements and competitions.

Keywords

SMT-COMP Competition SMT-LIB SMT solvers Model checking 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aziz, M.A.: A novel portfolio solver for satisfiability modulo theory problems (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aziz, M.A., Wassal, A., Darwish, N.: A machine learning technique for hardness estimation of QFBV SMT problems (work in progress). In: SMT Workshop 2012 10th International Workshop on Satisfiability Modulo Theories SMT-COMP 2012, p. 56 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrett, C., Deters, M., de Moura, L., Oliveras, A.: A stump. 6 years of SMT-COMP (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barrett, C., Stump, A., Tinelli, C.: The SMT-LIB standard: version 2.0. In: Gupta, A, Kroening, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Satisfiability Modulo Theories (Edinburgh, England) (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Le Berre, D., Simon, L.: The essentials of the SAT 2003 competition. In: Sixth international conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing, vol. 2919 of LNCS, pp. 452–467. Springer (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pelletier, F.J., Sutcliffe, G., Suttner, C.B.: The Development of CASC. AI Communications 15(2–3), 79–90 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stump, A., Sutcliffe, G., Tinelli, C.: StarExec: a cross-community infrastructure for logic solving. In: Demri, S., Kapur, D., Weidenbach, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on automated reasoning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sutcliffe, G.: The CADE ATP System Competition Design and Organization., http://www.cs.miami.edu/tptp/CASC/24/Design.html#Evaluation
  9. 9.
    Federated logic conference (FLoC) olympic games. http://vsl2014.at/olympics/
  10. 10.
    The SMT-COMP web site provides results of the SMT competition and links to the system descriptions of the participants., http://smtcomp.org
  11. 11.
    StarExec web site., http://www.starexec.org

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GrammaTech, Inc.IthacaUSA
  2. 2.University of IowaIowa CityUSA
  3. 3.Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations