Memory Efficient All-Solutions SAT Solver and Its Application for Reachability Analysis
This work presents a memory-efficient All-SAT engine which, given a propositional formula over sets of important and non-important variables, returns the set of all the assignments to the important variables, which can be extended to solutions (satisfying assignments) to the formula. The engine is built using elements of modern SAT solvers, including a scheme for learning conflict clauses and non-chronological backtracking. Re-discovering solutions that were already found is avoided by the search algorithm itself, rather than by adding blocking clauses. As a result, the space requirements of a solved instance do not increase when solutions are found. Finding the next solution is as efficient as finding the first one, making it possible to solve instances for which the number of solutions is larger than the size of the main memory.
We show how to exploit our All-SAT engine for performing image computation and use it as a basic block in achieving full reachability which is purely SAT-based (no BDDs involved).
We implemented our All-SAT solver and reachability algorithm using the state-of-the-art SAT solver Chaff  as a code base. The results show that our new scheme significantly outperforms All-SAT algorithms that use blocking clauses, as measured by the execution time, the memory requirement, and the number of steps performed by the reachability analysis.
KeywordsModel Check Conjunctive Normal Form Propositional Formula Satisfying Assignment Reachability Analysis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Beer, I., Ben-David, S., Landver, A.: On-the-fly model checking of RCTL formulas. In: 10th Computer Aided Verification, pp. 184–194 (1998)Google Scholar
- 2.Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E.M., Fujita, M., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking using SAT procedures instead of BDDs. In: D. (ed.) IEEE Computer Society Press (June 1999)Google Scholar
- 6.Chauhan, P., Clarke, E.M., Kroening, D.: Using SAT based image computation for reachability analysis. Technical Report CMU-CS-03-151, Carnegie Mellon University (2003)Google Scholar
- 7.Chauhan, P.P., Clarke, E.M., Kroening, D.: A SAT-based algorithm for reparameterization in symbolic simulation. In: DAC (2004)Google Scholar
- 8.Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A machine program for theorem proving. CACM 5(7) (July 1962)Google Scholar
- 10.Goldberg, E., Novikov, Y.: Berkmin: A fast and robust SAT-solver. In: DATE (2002)Google Scholar
- 12.Bayardo Jr., R.J., Pehoushek, J.D.: Counting models using connected components. In: IAAI, pp. 157–162. AAAI, Menlo Park (2000)Google Scholar
- 13.Kang, H.J., Park, I.C.: SAT-based unbounded symbolic model checking. In: DAC (2003)Google Scholar
- 15.Letz, R.: Advances in decision procedures for quantified boolean formulas. In: IJCAR (2001)Google Scholar
- 16.Li, C.M., Anbulagan: Heuristics based on unit propagation for satisfiability problems. IJCAI 1, 366–371 (1997)Google Scholar
- 17.Marques-Silva, J.P., Sakallah, K.A.: Conflict analysis in search algorithms for propositional satisfiability. In: IEEE ICTAI (1996)Google Scholar
- 18.McMillan, K.L.: Applying SAT methods in unbounded symbolic model checking. In: Computer Aided Verification (2002)Google Scholar
- 19.Moskewicz, M.W., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: 39th Design Aotomation Conference, DAC 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
- 20.Plaisted, D.: Method for design verification of hardware and non-hardware systems. United States Patents, 6,131, 078 (October 2000)Google Scholar
- 21.Roth, D.: On the hardness of approximate reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 82(1-2) (1996)Google Scholar
- 22.Sapra, S., Theobald, M., Clarke, E.M.: SAT-based algorithms for logic minimization. In: ICCD (2003)Google Scholar
- 24.Berkeley University of California. Espresso, two level boolean minimizer (1990)Google Scholar
- 25.Yadgar, A.: Solving All-SAT problem for reachability analysis. M.Sc. thesis, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Department of Computer Schience (2004)Google Scholar
- 26.Zhang, H.: SATO: An efficient propositional prover. In: McCune, W. (ed.) CADE 1997. LNCS, vol. 1249, Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
- 27.Zhang, L., Madigan, C.F., Moskewicz, M.W., Malik, S.: Efficient conflict driven learning in boolean satisfiability solver. In: ICCAD (2001)Google Scholar