MathCheck2: A SAT+CAS Verifier for Combinatorial Conjectures

  • Curtis Bright
  • Vijay Ganesh
  • Albert Heinle
  • Ilias Kotsireas
  • Saeed Nejati
  • Krzysztof Czarnecki
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9890)

Abstract

In this paper we present MathCheck2, a tool which combines sophisticated search procedures of current SAT solvers with domain specific knowledge provided by algorithms implemented in computer algebra systems (CAS). MathCheck2 is aimed to finitely verify or to find counterexamples to mathematical conjectures, building on our previous work on the MathCheck system. Using MathCheck2 we validated the Hadamard conjecture from design theory for matrices up to rank 136 and a few additional ranks up to 156. Also, we provide an independent verification of the claim that Williamson matrices of order 35 do not exist, and demonstrate for the first time that 35 is the smallest number with this property. Finally, we provided more than 160 matrices to the Magma Hadamard database that are not equivalent to any matrices previously included in that database.

References

  1. 1.
    Ábrahám, E.: Building bridges between symbolic computation and satisfiability checking. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, pp. 1–6. ACM, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Armand, M., Faure, G., Grégoire, B., Keller, C., Théry, L., Wener, B.: Verifying SAT and SMT in CoQ for a fully automated decision procedure. In: PSATTT 2011: International Workshop on Proof-Search in Axiomatic Theories and Type Theories, pp. 11–25 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biere, A., Heule, M., van Maaren, H., Walsh, T. (eds.): Handbook of Satisfiability. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 185. IOS Press (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bosma, W., Cannon, J., Playoust, C.: The Magma algebra system I: the user language. J. Symbolic Comput. 24(3), 235–265 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bouton, T., Caminha B. de Oliveira, D., Déharbe, D., Fontaine, P.: veriT: an open, trustable and efficient SMT-Solver. In: Schmidt, R.A. (ed.) CADE-22. LNCS, vol. 5663, pp. 151–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Char, B.W., Fee, G.J., Geddes, K.O., Gonnet, G.H., Monagan, M.B.: A tutorial introduction to Maple. J. Symbolic Comput. 2(2), 179–200 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Colbourn, C.J., Dinitz, J.H. (eds.): Handbook of Combinatorial Designs. Discrete Mathematics and its Applications (Boca Raton), 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cox, D., Little, J., O’Shea, D.: Ideals, Varieties, and Algorithms, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (1992)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Decker, W., Greuel, G.M., Pfister, G., Schönemann, H.: Singular 4-0-2 – A computer algebra system for polynomial computations (2015). http://www.singular.uni-kl.de
  10. 10.
    Hadamard, J.: Résolution d’une question relative aux déterminants. Bull. Sci. Math. 17(1), 240–246 (1893)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hearn, A.: Reduce user’s manual, version 3.8 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hedayat, A., Wallis, W.: Hadamard matrices and their applications. Ann. Stat. 6(6), 1184–1238 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hnich, B., Prestwich, S.D., Selensky, E., Smith, B.M.: Constraint models for the covering test problem. Constraints 11(2), 199–219 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holzmann, W.H., Kharaghani, H., Tayfeh-Rezaie, B.: Williamson matrices up to order 59. Des. Codes Crypt. 46(3), 343–352 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Junges, S., Loup, U., Corzilius, F., Ábrahám, E.: On Gröbner bases in the context of satisfiability-modulo-theories solving over the real numbers. In: Muntean, T., Poulakis, D., Rolland, R. (eds.) CAI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8080, pp. 186–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Konev, B., Lisitsa, A.: A SAT attack on the Erdős discrepancy conjecture. In: Sinz, C., Egly, U. (eds.) SAT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8561, pp. 219–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kotsireas, I.S.: Algorithms and metaheuristics for combinatorial matrices. In: Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization, pp. 283–309. Springer, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liang, J.H., Ganesh, V., Poupart, P., Czarnecki, K.: Learning rate based branching heuristic for SAT solvers. In: Creignou, N., Le Berre, D., Le Berre, D., Le Berre, D., Le Berre, D., Le Berre, D. (eds.) SAT 2016. LNCS, vol. 9710, pp. 123–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40970-2_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liang, J.H., Ganesh, V., Poupart, P., Czarnecki, K.: Exponential recency weighted average branching heuristic for SAT solvers. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marques-Silva, J.P., Sakallah, K., et al.: GRASP: a search algorithm for propositional satisfiability. IEEE Trans. Comput. 48(5), 506–521 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moskewicz, M.W., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Design Automation Conference, pp. 530–535. ACM, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    de Moura, L., Kong, S., Avigad, J., van Doorn, F., von Raumer, J.: The lean theorem prover (system description). In: Felty, P.A., Middeldorp, A. (eds.) CADE-25. LNCS, vol. 9195, pp. 378–388. Springer, Switzerland (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muller, D.E.: Application of Boolean Algebra to Switching Circuit Design and to Error Detection. Electron. Comput. Trans. IRE Prof. Group Electron. Comput. EC-3(3), 6–12 (1954)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nadel, A., Ryvchin, V.: Efficient SAT solving under assumptions. In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 242–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Đoković, D.Ž.: Williamson matrices of order \(4n\) for \(n = 33\), \(35\), \(39\). Discrete Math. 115(1), 267–271 (1993)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Đoković, D.Ž., Kotsireas, I.S.: Compression of periodic complementary sequences and applications. Des. Codes Crypt. 74(2), 365–377 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Paley, R.E.: On orthogonal matrices. J. Math. Phys. 12(1), 311–320 (1933)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Prestwich, S.D., Hnich, B., Simonis, H., Rossi, R., Tarim, S.A.: Partial symmetry breaking by local search in the group. Constraints 17(2), 148–171 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reed, I.: A class of multiple-error-correcting codes and the decoding scheme. Trans. IRE Prof. Group Inf. Theory 4(4), 38–49 (1954)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Riel, J.: nsoks: A Maple script for writing \(n\) as a sum of \(k\) squaresGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Seberry, J.: Library of Williamson Matrices. http://www.uow.edu.au/~jennie/WILLIAMSON/williamson.html
  32. 32.
    Sloane, N.: Library of Hadamard Matrices. http://neilsloane.com/hadamard/
  33. 33.
    Sylvester, J.J.: Thoughts on inverse orthogonal matrices, simultaneous sign successions, and tessellated pavements in two or more colours, with applications to Newton’s rule, ornamental tile-work, and the theory of numbers. London Edinb. Dublin Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 34(232), 461–475 (1867)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    SC\({{}^{2}}\): Satisfiability checking and symbolic computation. http://www.sc-square.org/
  35. 35.
    The Sage Developers: Sage Mathematics Software (Version 7.0) (2016). http://www.sagemath.org
  36. 36.
    Walsh, J.L.: A closed set of normal orthogonal functions. Am. J. Math. 45(1), 5–24 (1923)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Williamson, J.: Hadamard’s determinant theorem and the sum of four squares. Duke Math. J 11(1), 65–81 (1944)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wolfram, S.: The Mathematica Book, version 4. Cambridge University Press (1999)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zulkoski, E., Ganesh, V., Czarnecki, K.: MathCheck: a math assistant via a combination of computer algebra systems and SAT solvers. In: Felty, P.A., Middeldorp, A. (eds.) CADE-25. LNCS, vol. 9195, pp. 607–622. Springer, Switzerland (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Curtis Bright
    • 1
  • Vijay Ganesh
    • 1
  • Albert Heinle
    • 1
  • Ilias Kotsireas
    • 2
  • Saeed Nejati
    • 1
  • Krzysztof Czarnecki
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Wilfred Laurier UniversityWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations