The 481 Ways to Split a Clause and Deal with Propositional Variables

  • Kryštof Hoder
  • Andrei Voronkov
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7898)


It is often the case that first-order problems contain propositional variables and that proof-search generates many clauses that can be split into components with disjoint sets of variables. This is especially true for problems coming from some applications, where many ground literals occur in the problems and even more are generated.

The problem of dealing with such clauses has so far been addressed using either splitting with backtracking (as in Spass [14]) or splitting without backtracking (as in Vampire [7]). However, the only extensive experiments described in the literature [6] show that on the average using splitting solves fewer problems, yet there are some problems that can be solved only using splitting.

We tried to identify essential issues contributing to efficiency in dealing with splitting in resolution theorem provers and enhanced the theorem prover Vampire with new options, algorithms and datastructures dealing with splitting. This paper describes these options, algorithms and datastructures and analyses their performance in extensive experiments carried out over the TPTP library [12]. Another contribution of this paper is a calculus RePro separating propositional reasoning from first-order reasoning.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bachmair, L., Ganzinger, H.: Resolution theorem proving. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 2, vol. I, pp. 19–99. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bryant, R.E.: Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transaction on Computers 35(8), 677–691 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fietzke, A., Weidenbach, C.: Labelled splitting. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 55(1-2), 3–34 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korovin, K.: iProver – an instantiation-based theorem prover for first-order logic (System description). In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 292–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nieuwenhuis, R., Rubio, A.: Paramodulation-based theorem proving. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 7, vol. I, pp. 371–443. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Riazanov, A., Voronkov, A.: Splitting without backtracking. In: Nebel, B. (ed.) 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2001, vol. 1, pp. 611–617 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Riazanov, A., Voronkov, A.: The design and implementation of Vampire. AI Commun. 15(2,3), 91–110 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Riazanov, A., Voronkov, A.: Limited resource strategy in resolution theorem proving. Journal of Symbolic Computations 36(1-2), 101–115 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schulz, S.: E – a brainiac theorem prover. Journal of AI Communications 15(2-3), 111–126 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sekar, R., Ramakrishnan, I.V., Voronkov, A.: Term indexing. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 26, vol. II, pp. 1853–1964. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sutcliffe, G.: The 4th ijcar automated theorem proving system competition - casc-j4. AI Communications 22(1), 59–72 (2009)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sutcliffe, G.: The tptp problem library and associated infrastructure. J. Autom. Reasoning 43(4), 337–362 (2009)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Voronkov, A.: The anatomy of Vampire: Implementing bottom-up procedures with code trees. Journal of Automated Reasoning 15(2), 237–265 (1995)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weidenbach, C.: Combining superposition, sorts and splitting. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 27, vol. II, pp. 1965–2013. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kryštof Hoder
    • 1
  • Andrei Voronkov
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations