Symmetry Propagation: Improved Dynamic Symmetry Breaking in SAT

Devriendt, Jo; Bogaerts, Bart; Cat, Broes De; Denecker, Marc; Mears, Christopher

doi:10.1109/ictai.2012.16

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We now plan to focus on combining our approach with symmetry propagation [9]. It seems that such a combination could be implemented thanks to minor changes on our algorithm.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main advantage of such an approach is to cope with the heavy (and potentially blocking) pre-generation phase of the static-based approaches, but also offers opportunities to combine with other dynamic-based approaches, like the symmetry propagation technique [9]. It also gives more flexibility for adjusting some parameters on the fly.…”

Section: Proposed Solutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They intervene directly during the search exploration. It concerns, to mention but a few, the injection of symmetric versions of learned clauses [7,21], particular classes of symmetries [20], or speeding up the search by inferring symmetric facts [9]. These approaches succeeded in treating particular and hand crafted problems but, to the best of our knowledge, none of them is competitive face to the static symmetry breaking methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, if only a subset of the symmetries is considered then the resulting search pruning will not be that interesting and its effectiveness depends heavily on the heuristically chosen symmetries [4]. Besides, these approaches are preprocessors, so their combination with other techniques, such as symmetry propagation [9], can be very hard. Also, tuning their parameters during the solving turns out to be very difficult.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

CDCLSym: Introducing Effective Symmetry Breaking in SAT Solving

Metin¹,

Baarir

Colange

et al. 2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. SAT solvers are now widely used to solve a large variety of problems, including formal verification of systems. SAT problems derived from such applications often exhibit symmetry properties that could be exploited to speed up their solving. Static symmetry breaking is so far the most popular approach to take advantage of symmetries. It relies on a symmetry preprocessor which augments the initial problem with constraints that force the solver to consider only a few configurations among the many symmetric ones. This paper presents a new way to handle symmetries, that avoid the main problem of the current static approaches: the prohibitive cost of the preprocessing phase. Our proposal has been implemented in MiniSym. Extensive experiments on the benchmarks of last six SAT competitions show that our approach is competitive with the best state-of-the-art static symmetry breaking solutions.

show abstract

“…We now plan to focus on combining our approach with symmetry propagation [9]. It seems that such a combination could be implemented thanks to minor changes on our algorithm.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Proposed Solutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

CDCLSym: Introducing Effective Symmetry Breaking in SAT Solving

Metin¹,

Baarir

Colange

et al. 2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Symmetry detection takes as input a theory T and a partial structure I and returns symmetries over T and I . A symmetry is a function, say f , mapping structures to structures, such that, for any two-valued expansion J of I that is a model of T , f (J) is also a model [Devriendt et al 2012]. Symmetry detection also returns clauses to break these symmetries and to eliminate symmetric models.…”

Section: Advanced Features 27mentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicate logic as a modeling language: the IDP system

Cat¹,

Bogaerts

Bruynooghe³

et al. 2018

Declarative Logic Programming: Theory, Systems, and Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the technology of the time, Kowalski's seminal 1974 paper Predicate Logic as a Programming Language was a breakthrough for the use of logic in computer science. It introduced two fundamental ideas: on the declarative side, the use of the Horn clause logic fragment of classical logic, which was soon extended with negation as failure, on the procedural side the procedural interpretation which made it possible to write algorithms in the formalism.Since then, strong progress was made both on the declarative understanding of the logic programming formalism and in automated reasoning technologies, particularly in SAT solving, Constraint Programming and Answer Set Programming. This has paved the way for the development of an extension of logic programming that embodies a more pure view of logic as a modelling language and its role for problem solving.In this chapter, we present the IDP language and system. The language is essentially classical logic extended with one of logic programmings most important contributions to knowledge representation: the representation of complex definitions as rule sets under wellfounded semantics. The system is a knowledge base system: a system in which complex declarative information is stored in a knowledge base which can be used to solve different computational problems by applying multiple forms of inference. In this view, theories are declarative modellings, bags of information, i.e., descriptions of possible states of affairs. They are neither procedures nor descriptions of computational problems. As such, the IDP language and system preserve the fundamental idea of a declarative reading of logic programs, while they break with the fundamental idea of the procedural interpretation of logic programs.

show abstract