2010
DOI: 10.3233/sat190075
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Sat4j library, release 2.2

Abstract: Sat4j is a mature, open source library of SAT-based solvers in Java. It provides a modular SAT solver architecture designed to work with generic constraints. Such architecture is used to provide SAT, MaxSat and pseudo-boolean and solvers for lightweight constraint programming. Those solvers have been evaluated regularly in the corresponding international competitive events. The library has been adopted by several academic softwares and the widely used Eclipse platform, which relies on a pseudo-boolean solver f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
203
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 315 publications
(204 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
203
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We have implemented the proposed synthesis technique in a new tool called Migrator, which is implemented in Java. Migrator uses the Sat4J solver [31] for answering all SAT and MaxSAT queries and the Mediator tool [54] for verifying equivalence between a pair of database programs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have implemented the proposed synthesis technique in a new tool called Migrator, which is implemented in Java. Migrator uses the Sat4J solver [31] for answering all SAT and MaxSAT queries and the Mediator tool [54] for verifying equivalence between a pair of database programs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sugar translates a CSP instance to an instance of the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT). SAT4J is a SAT solver [11]. Sugar and SAT4J are both written in Java.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As our proposed approach in this work (which based upon continuous optimization) differs quite substantially from these approaches, we refer the reader to a recent survey (Morgado et al, 2013) for much more detailed descriptions about the current state of the art. However, broadly speaking, there have been two main classes for these discrete solvers: 1) those based upon bounding the solution via SAT method (Marques-Sila and Planes, 2011;Koshimura et al, 2012;Ansótegui, Bonet, and Levy, 2013;Fu and Malik, 2006;Le Berre and Parrain, 2010;Eén and Sorensson, 2006) which in turn exploit the heuristic developed by the SAT community such as those in the MiniSAT solver; these solvers typically are complete in that they will both produce a satisfying assignment with some number of clauses satisfied and a verification that this is the optimal solution to the problem. And 2) those based upon local search (Luo et al, 2015(Luo et al, , 2017, which maintain and locally adjust a solution to satisfy an increasing number of clauses; these solvers typically are incomplete in that they may quickly find an assignment, but often cannot prove whether or not it is optimal.…”
Section: Discrete Maxsat Solversmentioning
confidence: 99%