The SAT2002 competition

Simon, Laurent; Berre, Daniel Le; Hirsch, Edward

doi:10.1007/s10472-005-0424-6

Cited by 30 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Figure 3 (right) we also checked the standing of QUBE++ with respect to the state of the art in SAT using a set of 483 challenging real-world SAT instances. We compared QUBE++(3LW), QUBEREL, the best state-of-the-art solver on real-world QBFs according to our experiments, and ZCHAFF, the winner of SAT 2002 competition [1] and one of the best solvers in SAT 2003 competition [2] on real-world SAT instances. We have used QUBE++(3LW) instead of QUBE++ since it is well known that MLF is not helpful in SAT and, in our experiments, MLF degraded the performances of QUBE++ on most SAT instances.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following the standard practice of SAT competitions [1,2], we consider as real-world the instances originated by translations from application domains such as, e.g., Formal Verification [3,4], Planning [5,6], and Reasoning about Knowledge [7]. In the last evaluation of QBF solvers [8], instances of this kind emerged as challenging benchmarks for the current state-of-the-art tools: real-world benchmarks represented about 50% of the evaluation test set, and they constituted about 95% of the "hard" instances, i.e., problems that could not be solved by any of the participants within the allotted time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…QUBE++ is able to solve 10% of the instances that defied all the participants in the QBF evaluation, and it is up to one, two, and nearly three orders of magnitude faster than, respectively, QUBEREL, QUBEBJ and SEMPROP, i.e., the best QBF solvers on nonrandom instances according to [8]. We have also tried QUBE++ on a test set of challenging real-world SAT benchmarks together with QUBEREL, the previous best version of QUBE, and ZCHAFF, the winner of SAT 2002 competition [1] and one of the best solvers in SAT 2003 competition [2] on real-world SAT instances. The results show that QUBE++ is able to conquer about 90% of the test set, and it loses, medianly, only a factor of two from ZCHAFF, while QUBEREL, conquers only 50% of the test set and it is, medianly, one order of magnitude slower than ZCHAFF.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

QBF Reasoning on Real-World Instances

Giunchiglia

Narizzano

Tacchella

2005

Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. During the recent years, the development of tools for deciding Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBFs) has been accompanied by a steady supply of real-world instances, i.e., QBFs originated by translations from application domains. Instances of this kind showed to be challenging for current state-of-the-art QBF solvers, while the ability to deal effectively with them is necessary to foster adoption of QBF-based reasoning in practice. In this paper we describe three reasoning techniques that we implemented in our solver QUBE++ to increase its performances on real-world instances coming from formal verification and planning domains. We present experimental results that witness the contribution of each technique and the better performances of QUBE++ with respect to other state-of-the-art QBF solvers. The effectiveness of QUBE++ is further confirmed by experiments run on challenging real-world SAT instances, where QUBE++ turns out to be competitive with respect to current state-ofthe-art SAT solvers.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

QBF Reasoning on Real-World Instances

Giunchiglia

Narizzano

Tacchella

2005

Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact the XOR-Chain series of benchmarks, on which Cassatt peforms quite well, contains the smallest unsatisfiable benchmark that was unsolved in the SAT02 competition [28]. The two other series where Cassatt does well, the Bart series and Homer series, represent FPGA switch-box problems as described in [9].…”

Section: Conclusion and Ongoing Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…shows how Cassatt and a few well known SAT solvers fare on a subset of benchmarks taken from the SAT02 competition [28]. The benchmarks were run on machines with 2.0 GHz processors with 1GB of RAM.…”

Section: Appendix A: Cassatt On Other Benchmarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolution cannot polynomially simulate compressed-BFS

Motter

Roy

Markov

2005

Ann Math Artif Intell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many algorithms for Boolean satisfiability (SAT) work within the framework of resolution as a proof system, and thus on unsatisfiable instances they can be viewed as attempting to find proofs by resolution. However it has been known since the 1980s that every resolution proof of the pigeonhole principle (PHP m n ), suitably encoded as a CNF instance, includes exponentially many steps [1]. Therefore SAT solvers based upon the DLL procedure [2] or the DP procedure [3] must take exponential time. Polynomial-sized proofs of the pigeonhole principle exist for different proof systems, but general-purpose SAT solvers often remain confined to resolution. This result is in correlation with empirical evidence.Previously, we introduced the Compressed-BFS algorithm to solve the SAT decision problem. In an earlier work [4], an implementation of a Compressed-BFS algorithm empirically solved PHP n·1 n instances in Θ´n 4 µ time. Here, we add to this claim, and show analytically that these instances are solvable in polynomial time by Compressed-BFS. Thus the class of tautologies efficiently provable by Compressed-BFS is different than that of any resolution-based procedure.We hope that the details of our complexity analysis shed some light on the proof system implied by Compressed-BFS. Our proof focuses on structural invariants within the compressed data structure that stores collections of sets of open clauses during the Compressed-BFS algorithm. We bound the size of this data structure, as well as the overall memory, by a polynomial. We then use this to show that the overall runtime is bounded by a polynomial.

show abstract

Evolutionary Computing for the Satisfiability Problem

Hao

Lardeux

Saubion

2003

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents GASAT, a hybrid evolutionary algorithm for the satisfiability problem (SAT). A specific crossover operator generates new solutions, that are improved by a tabu search procedure. The performance of GASAT is assessed using a set of well-known benchmarks. Comparisons with state-of-the-art SAT algorithms show that GASAT gives very competitive results. These experiments also allow us to introduce a new SAT benchmark from a coloring problem.

show abstract

The SAT2002 competition

Cited by 30 publications

References 46 publications

QBF Reasoning on Real-World Instances

QBF Reasoning on Real-World Instances

Resolution cannot polynomially simulate compressed-BFS

Evolutionary Computing for the Satisfiability Problem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About