An Abstract Interpretation of DPLL(T)

  • Martin Brain
  • Vijay D’Silva
  • Leopold Haller
  • Alberto Griggio
  • Daniel Kroening
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7737)

Abstract

dpll(t) is a central algorithm for Satisfiability Modulo Theories (smt) solvers. The algorithm combines results of reasoning about the Boolean structure of a formula with reasoning about conjunctions of theory facts to decide satisfiability. This architecture enables modern solvers to combine the performance benefits of propositional satisfiability solvers and conjunctive theory solvers. We characterise dpll(t) as an abstract interpretation algorithm that computes a product of two abstractions. Our characterisation allows a new understanding of dpll(t) as an instance of an abstract procedure to combine reasoning engines beyond propositional solvers and conjunctive theory solvers. In addition, we show theoretically that the split into Boolean and theory reasoning is sometimes unnecessary and demonstrate empirically that it can be detrimental to performance.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Badban, B., van de Pol, J., Tveretina, O., Zantema, H.: Generalizing DPLL and satisfiability for equalities. Inf. Comput. 205(8) (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barrett, C., Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Splitting on Demand in SAT Modulo Theories. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4246, pp. 512–526. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrett, C.W., Sebastiani, R., Seshia, S.A., Tinelli, C.: Satisfiability modulo theories. In: Handbook of Satisfiability. IOS Press (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cotton, S.: Natural Domain SMT: A Preliminary Assessment. In: Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) FORMATS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6246, pp. 77–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Systematic design of program analysis frameworks. In: POPL (1979)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cousot, P., Cousot, R., Mauborgne, L.: The Reduced Product of Abstract Domains and the Combination of Decision Procedures. In: Hofmann, M. (ed.) FOSSACS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6604, pp. 456–472. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Silva, V., Haller, L., Kroening, D.: Satisfiability Solvers Are Static Analysers. In: Miné, A., Schmidt, D. (eds.) SAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7460, pp. 317–333. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D’Silva, V., Haller, L., Kroening, D.: Abstract Conflict Driven Clause Learning. In: POPL (to apppear, 2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’Silva, V., Haller, L., Kroening, D., Tautschnig, M.: Numeric Bounds Analysis with Conflict-Driven Learning. In: Flanagan, C., König, B. (eds.) TACAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7214, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dutertre, B., de Moura, L.: A Fast Linear-Arithmetic Solver for DPLL(T). In: Ball, T., Jones, R.B. (eds.) CAV 2006. LNCS, vol. 4144, pp. 81–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fränzle, M., Herde, C., Teige, T., Ratschan, S., Schubert, T.: Efficient solving of large non-linear arithmetic constraint systems with complex Boolean structure. JSAT 1(3-4) (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ganzinger, H., Hagen, G., Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: DPLL(T): Fast Decision Procedures. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 175–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Griggio, A.: A Practical Approach to Satisfiability Modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic. JSAT 8 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haller, L., Griggio, A., Brain, M., Kroening, D.: Deciding floating-point logic with systematic abstraction. In: FMCAD (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harris, W.R., Sankaranarayanan, S., Ivančić, F., Gupta, A.: Program analysis via satisfiability modulo path programs. In: POPL (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jin, H., Somenzi, F.: Strong conflict analysis for propositional satisfiability. In: DATE (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jovanović, D., de Moura, L.: Cutting to the Chase Solving Linear Integer Arithmetic. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) CADE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6803, pp. 338–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jovanović, D., de Moura, L.: Solving Non-linear Arithmetic. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) IJCAR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7364, pp. 339–354. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McMillan, K.L., Kuehlmann, A., Sagiv, M.: Generalizing DPLL to Richer Logics. In: Bouajjani, A., Maler, O. (eds.) CAV 2009. LNCS, vol. 5643, pp. 462–476. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A.: DPLL(T) with Exhaustive Theory Propagation and Its Application to Difference Logic. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 321–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Solving SAT and SAT modulo theories: From an abstract Davis–Putnam–Logemann–Loveland procedure to DPLL(T). JACM 53 (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thakur, A., Reps, T.: A Method for Symbolic Computation of Abstract Operations. In: Madhusudan, P., Seshia, S.A. (eds.) CAV 2012. LNCS, vol. 7358, pp. 174–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thakur, A., Reps, T.: A Generalization of Stålmarck’s Method. In: Miné, A., Schmidt, D. (eds.) SAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7460, pp. 334–351. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Brain
    • 1
  • Vijay D’Silva
    • 1
  • Leopold Haller
    • 1
  • Alberto Griggio
    • 2
  • Daniel Kroening
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Fondazione Bruno KesslerTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations