Splitting on Demand in SAT Modulo Theories
Lazy algorithms for Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) combine a generic DPLL-based SAT engine with a theory solver for the given theory T that can decide the T-consistency of conjunctions of ground literals. For many theories of interest, theory solvers need to reason by performing internal case splits. Here we argue that it is more convenient to delegate these case splits to the DPLL engine instead. The delegation can be done on demand for solvers that can encode their internal case splits into one or more clauses, possibly including new constants and literals. This results in drastically simpler theory solvers. We present this idea in an improved version of DPLL(T), a general SMT architecture for the lazy approach, and formalize and prove it correct in an extension of Abstract DPLL Modulo Theories, a framework for modeling and reasoning about lazy algorithms for SMT. A remarkable additional feature of the architecture, also discussed in the paper, is that it naturally includes an efficient Nelson-Oppen-like combination of multiple theories and their solvers.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Barrett, C., Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Splitting on demand in satisfiability modulo theories. Technical report. University of Iowa (2006), Available at: ftp://ftp.cs.uiowa.edu/pub/tinelli/papers/BarNOT-RR-06.pdf
- 3.Barrett, C.W.: Checking Validity of Quantifier-Free Formulas in Combinations of First-Order Theories. PhD thesis, Stanford University (2003)Google Scholar
- 6.Bozzano, M., Bruttomesso, R., Cimatti, A., Junttila, T.A., Ranise, S., van Rossum, P., Sebastiani, R.: Efficient theory combination via boolean search. Information and Computation; Cf. conference paper at CAV 2005 (to appear)Google Scholar
- 13.Stump, A., Barrett, C.W., Dill, D.L., Levitt, J.R.: A decision procedure for an extensional theory of arrays. In: LICS 2001, pp. 29–37. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
- 14.Tinelli, C., Harandi, M.T.: A new correctness proof of the Nelson–Oppen combination procedure. In: FroCoS 1996, pp. 103–120. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1996)Google Scholar