Abstract
Nowadays, Conflict-Driven Clause Learning (CDCL) techniques are one of the key components of modern SAT solvers specialized in industrial instances. Last years, one of the focuses has been put on strategies to select which learnt clauses are removed during the search. Originally, one need for removing clauses was motivated by the finiteness of memory. Recently, it has been shown that more aggressive clause deletion policies may improve solvers performance, even when memory is sufficient. Also, the utility of learnt clauses has been related to the modular structure of industrial SAT instances.
In this paper, we show that augmenting SAT instances with learnt clauses does not always make them easier for the SAT solver. In fact, it makes worse the solver performance in many cases. However, we identify a set of highly useful learnt clauses, and we show that augmenting SAT instances with this set of clauses contributes to improve the solver performance in many cases, especially in satisfiable formulas. These clauses are related to the community structure of the formula, and they can be computed in a fast preprocessing step. This would suggest that the community structure may play an important role in clause deletion policies.
This work is partially supported by the CSIC project 201450E045, and the Ministerio de Economía y Competividad research project TASSAT2: TIN2013-48031-C4-4-P.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ansótegui, C., Giráldez-Cru, J., Levy, J.: The community structure of SAT formulas. In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 410–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Predicting learnt clauses quality in modern SAT solvers. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 399–404 (2009)
Biere, A.: Lingeling essentials, A tutorial on design and implementation aspects of the the SAT solver Lingeling. In: Proc. of POS 2014 (2014)
Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.L., Lambiotte, R., Lefebvre, E.: Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2008(10), P10008 (2008)
Brandes, U., Delling, D., Gaertler, M., Görke, R., Hoefer, M., Nikoloski, Z., Wagner, D.: On modularity clustering. IEEE Trans. on Knowledge and Data Engineering 20(2), 172–188 (2008)
Chen, J.: A bit-encoding phase selection strategy for satisfiability solvers. In: Gopal, T.V., Agrawal, M., Li, A., Cooper, S.B. (eds.) TAMC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8402, pp. 158–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Gomes, C.P., Selman, B., Kautz, H.A.: Boosting combinatorial search through randomization. In: Proc. of the Fifteenth National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 1998, pp. 431–437 (1998)
Järvisalo, M., Heule, M.J.H., Biere, A.: Inprocessing rules. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) IJCAR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7364, pp. 355–370. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Katebi, H., Sakallah, K.A., Marques-Silva, J.P.: Empirical study of the anatomy of modern sat solvers. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds.) SAT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6695, pp. 343–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Katsirelos, G., Simon, L.: Eigenvector centrality in industrial SAT instances. In: Milano, M. (ed.) CP 2012. LNCS, pp. 348–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Martins, R., Manquinho, V., Lynce, I.: Community-based partitioning for MaxSAT solving. In: Järvisalo, M., Van Gelder, A. (eds.) SAT 2013. LNCS, vol. 7962, pp. 182–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Moskewicz, M.W., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: Engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: Proc. of DAC 2001, pp. 530–535 (2001)
Newman, M.E.J., Girvan, M.: Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69(2), 026113 (2004)
Newsham, Z., Ganesh, V., Fischmeister, S., Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Impact of community structure on SAT solver performance. In: Sinz, C., Egly, U. (eds.) SAT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8561, pp. 252–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Pipatsrisawat, K., Darwiche, A.: A lightweight component caching scheme for satisfiability solvers. In: Marques-Silva, J., Sakallah, K.A. (eds.) SAT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4501, pp. 294–299. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Silva, J.P.M., Sakallah, K.A.: GRASP: A search algorithm for propositional satisfiability. IEEE Trans. Computers 48(5), 506–521 (1999)
Simon, L.: Post mortem analysis of SAT solver proofs. In: Proc. of POS 2014, pp. 26–40 (2014)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ansótegui, C., Giráldez-Cru, J., Levy, J., Simon, L. (2015). Using Community Structure to Detect Relevant Learnt Clauses. In: Heule, M., Weaver, S. (eds) Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing -- SAT 2015. SAT 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9340. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24318-4_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24318-4_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24317-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24318-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)