Advertisement

Enhancing maximum satisfiability algorithms with pure literal strategies

  • Richard J. Wallace
Knowledge Representation V: Search
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1081)

Abstract

Maximum satisfiability (MAX-SAT) is an extension of satisfiability (SAT), in which a partial solution is sought that satisfies the maximum number of clauses in a logical formula. In recent years there has been an growing interest in this and other types of over-constrained problems. Branch and bound extensions of the Davis-Putnam algorithm can return guaranteed optimal solutions to these problems. Earlier work did not make use of a pure literal rule because it appealed to be inefficient here, as for traditional SAT. However, arguments can be adduced to show that pure literals are likely to appear during search for MAX-2SAT, so that fixation of their variables may be effective here. The present work confirms this and also shows that a value ordering heuristic involving literals that are monotone in unit open clauses can be very effective, operating somewhat independently of the ordinary fixation of fully monotone literals. Alone or together, these pure literal strategies can produce improvements of an order of magnitude or more when combined with versions of Davis-Putnam studied in earlier work, sometimes solving problems of considerable size.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [BJL86]
    C. E. Blair, R. G. Jeroslow, and J. K. Lowe. Some results and experiments in programming techniques for prepositional logic. Comput. & Opns. Res., 13:633–645, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. [DABC95]
    O. Dubois, P. Andre, Y. Boufkhad, and J. Carlier. Sat versus unsat. In D. S. Johnson and M. A. Trick, editors, Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability: Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge, page (to appear). Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. [DLL62]
    M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. Loveland. A machine program for theoremproving. Comm. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 5:394–397, 1962.Google Scholar
  4. [DP60]
    M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 7:201–215, 1960.Google Scholar
  5. [FW92]
    E. C. Freuder and R. J. Wallace. Partial constraint satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence, 58:21–70, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. [GJS76]
    M. R. Garey, D. S. Johnson, and L. Stockmeyer. Some simplified npcomplete graph problems. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 1:237–267, 1976.Google Scholar
  7. [GU89]
    G. Gallo and G. Urbani. Algorithms for testing the satisfiability of prepositional formulae. J. Logic Program., 7:45–61, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [HJ87]
    P. Hansen and B. Jaumard. Algorithms for the maximum satisfiability problem. RUTCOR Research Report No. 43–87, RUTCOR, Rutgers University, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. [HJ90]
    P. Hansen and B. Jaumard. Algorithms for the maximum satisfiability problem. Computing, 44:279–303, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [JT95]
    D. S. Johnson and M. A. Trick. Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability: Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [Lar92]
    T. Larrabee. Test pattern generation using Boolean satisfiability. IEE. Trans. Computer-Aided Design, 11:4–15, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [MSL92]
    D. B. Mitchell, B. Selman, and H. Levesque. Hard and easy distributions of sat problems. In Proceedings AAAI-93, pages 459–465, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. [Pur84]
    P. Purdom. Solving satisfiability with less searching. IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Mach. Intell., 6:510–513, 1984.Google Scholar
  14. [SFV95]
    T. Schiex, H. Falgier, and G. Verfaillie. Valued constraint satisfaction problems: Hard and easy problems. In Proceedings IJCAI-95, pages 631–637, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. [Wal95]
    R. J. Wallace. Directed arc consistency preprocessing as a strategy for maximal constraint satisfaction. In M. Meyer, editor, Constraint Processing, volume 923 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 121–138. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. [WF95]
    R. J. Wallace and E. C. Freuder. Comparing constraint satisfaction and davis-putnam algorithms for the maximal satisfiability problem. In D. S. Johnson and M. A. Trick, editors, Cliques, Coloring and Satisfiability: Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge, (to appear). American Mathematical Society, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard J. Wallace
    • 1
  1. 1.University of New HampshireDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations