Computer Science ›› 2021, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (11): 294-299.doi: 10.11896/jsjkx.201000142

• Artificial Intelligence • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Branching Heuristic Strategy Based on Learnt Clauses Deletion Strategy for SAT Solver

WANG Yi-jie, XU Yang, WU Guan-feng   

  1. School of Mathematics,Southwest Jiaotong University,Chengdu 610031,China
    National-Local Joint Engineering Laboratory of System Credibility Automatic Verification,Chengdu 610031,China
  • Received:2020-10-26 Revised:2021-01-23 Online:2021-11-15 Published:2021-11-10
  • About author:WANG Yi-jie,born in 1997,postgra-duate.His main research interests include processing and automated reaso-ning.
    WU Guan-feng,born in 1986,Ph.D,is a member of China Computer Federation.His main research interests include intelligent information processing and parallel computing.
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China(61673320) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(2682020CX59).

Abstract: For the SAT solver,most popular branch variable decision-making strategies are based on the variable activity evaluation of conflict.The unassigned variable with the maximum activity is selected as the decision variable,and the most recent conflict is solved first.However,they all ignore the impact of the number of clauses containing decision variables on the Boolean constraint propagation (BCP).To solve this problem,this paper proposes a branch variable decision strategy (VDALCD) based on the learning clause deletion strategy,which reduces the activity of variables in the deleted clause when the clause is deleting.Based on the VDALCD strategy,Glucose4.1 and MapleLCMDistChronoBT-DL-v2.1 are improved to solvers Glucose4.1_VDALCD and Maple-DL_VDALCD.This paper uses 2018 and 2019 SAT international competition questions as benchmark test cases to compare the improved version with the original version of the solver.The experimental results show that Gluose4.1_VDALCD finds out 26 more examples than Gluose4.1,an increase of 15.5% in the 2018 example test.In the 2019 example test,Maple-DL_VDALCD finds out 17 more examples than MapleLCMDistChronoBT-DL-v2.1,an increase of 7.6%.

Key words: Activity, Complete algorithms, Learnt clause, Learnt clause deletion strategy, Satisfiability problem

CLC Number: 

  • TP181
[1]COOK S A.The complexity of Theorem-Proving Procedures[C]//Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theo-ry of Computing.New York:ACM,1971:151-158.
[2]KARP R M.Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems[M]//Complexity of Computer Conputation.Berlin:Spring US,1972:85-103.
[3]HOOS H H,STYUTZLE T.Stochastic Local Search:Foundations & Applications [M]//Access Online Via Elsecier.2004.
[4]ROBINSON J A.A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle[J].Journal of the ACM (JACM),1965,12(1):23-41.
[5]DAVIS M,PUTNAM H.A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory[J].Journal of the ACM(JACM),1960,7(3):201-215.
[6]DAVIS M,LOGEMANN G,LOVELAND D.A machine Pro-gram for Theorem Proving[J].Communication of the ACM,1962,5(7):394-397.
[7]MARQUES-SILVA J,LYNCE I,MALIK S.Conflict-DrivenClause Learning SAT Solves [M].Amsterdam:IOS Press,2009:127-149.
[8]MARQUES-SILVA J,SAKALLAH K.GRASP:A New Search Algorithm for Satisfiability [M]//The Best of ICCAD.New York:Springer,2003:73-89.
[9]LUO M,LI C M,XIAO F,et al.An Effective Learnt Clause Mi-nimization Approach for CDCL SAT Solvers[C]//Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.2017:703-711.
[10]SIMON L,AUDEMARD G.Predicting Learnt Clauses in Mo-dern SAT Solver[C]//Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'09).Menlo Park:AAAI Press,2009:399-404.
[11]BIEKE A.Lingeling and Friends Entering the SAT Challenge 2012[C]//Proceedings of SAT Challenge.2012:33-34.
[12]GLOUER F,KELLY J P,LAGUNA M.Genetic Algorithmsand Tabu Search:Hybrids for Optimization[J].Computer & Operations Research,1995,22(1):111-134.
[13]BURO M,BÜNING H K.Report on a SAT Competition [M]//Fachbereich Math-Informatik.Univ.Gesamthochschule.West Germany,1992.
[14]FREEMAN J W.Improvements to Propositional SatisfiabilitySearch Algorithms [D].Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania,1995.
[15]WEIDENBACH C,DIMOVA D,FIETZKE A,et al.SPASSVersion 3.5[C]//CADE.2009:140-145.
[16]BIERE A,FROHLICH A.Evaluating CDCL Variable Scoring Schemes[C]//Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing-SAT 2015.Switzerland:Springer USA,2015:405-422.
[17]RVAN L.Efficient Algorithms for Clause-Learning SAT Sol-vers [D].Vancouver:Simon Fraser University,2004.
[18]CHANG W J.Study of Satisfiability Solving Systems and Application Based on Contradiction Separation Based Multiple Dynamic Automated Deduction[D].Chengdu:Southwest Jiaotong University,2019.
[19]WANG G J.Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Resolution Principle[M].Beijing:Science Press,2003.
[20]CHEN Q S,XU Y,HE X X.Heuristic Complete Algorithm for SAT Problem by Using Logical Deduction[J].Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University,2017,52(6):1224-1232.
[21]AUDEMAND G,SIMON L.Predicting Learnt Clauses Quality in Modern SAT Solvers[C]//Proceeding of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial.Intelligence.San Francisco,CA:Margan Kaufmann,2009:399-404.
[1] XIAO Zhi-hong, HAN Ye-tong, ZOU Yong-pan. Study on Activity Recognition Based on Multi-source Data and Logical Reasoning [J]. Computer Science, 2022, 49(6A): 397-406.
[2] XING Yun-bing, LONG Guang-yu, HU Chun-yu, HU Li-sha. Human Activity Recognition Method Based on Class Increment SVM [J]. Computer Science, 2022, 49(5): 78-83.
[3] SUN Shan-wu, WANG Nan. Subprocesses Discovery Based on Structure and Activity Semantics [J]. Computer Science, 2021, 48(11A): 659-665.
[4] SHEN Xue, CHEN Shu-wei, AI Sen-yang. Reward Mechanism Based Branching Strategy for SAT Solver [J]. Computer Science, 2020, 47(7): 42-46.
[5] LIU Jiang, ZHOU Hong-hao. New Algebraic Logic Reduction Method for Boolean Formula [J]. Computer Science, 2020, 47(5): 32-37.
[6] ZHANG Chun-xiang, ZHAO Chun-lei, CHEN Chao, LUO Hui. Review of Human Activity Recognition Based on Mobile Phone Sensors [J]. Computer Science, 2020, 47(10): 1-8.
[7] LI Juan,FANG Xian-wen,WANG Li-li,LIU Xiang-wei. Chaotic Activity Filter Method for Business Process Based on Log Automaton [J]. Computer Science, 2020, 47(1): 66-71.
[8] XU Min-min, KOU Guang-jie, MA Yun-yan, YUE Jun, JIA Shi-xiang, ZHANG Zhi-wang. Color Image Enhancement Algorithm Based on PCNN Internal Activities [J]. Computer Science, 2019, 46(6A): 259-262.
[9] CAO Yi-qin, CAO Ting, HUANG Xiao-sheng. Image Fusion Method Based on àtrous-NSCT Transform and Region Characteristic [J]. Computer Science, 2019, 46(6): 270-276.
[10] HOU Yu-chen, WU Wei. Design and Implementation of Crowdsourcing System for Still Image Activity Annotation [J]. Computer Science, 2019, 46(11A): 580-583.
[11] MAO Yi-ping, YU Lei, GUAN Ze-jin. Multi-focus Image Fusion Based on Fractional Differential [J]. Computer Science, 2019, 46(11A): 315-319.
[12] HUANG Jin-guo, LIU Tao, ZHOU Xian-chun, YAN Xi-jun. Detection for Group Riot Activity Based on Change Analysis of Group Motion Pattern [J]. Computer Science, 2018, 45(9): 314-319.
[13] YU Ya-xin and ZHANG Hai-jun. Activity Recommendation Algorithm Based on Latent Friendships in EBSN [J]. Computer Science, 2018, 45(3): 196-203.
[14] CHEN Qing-shan, XU Yang, WU Guan-feng. Learnt Clause Evaluation Algorithm of SAT Problem Based on Trend Strength [J]. Computer Science, 2018, 45(12): 137-141.
[15] WANG Zhong-min, ZHANG Shuang and HE Yan. Selective Ensemble Learning Human Activity Recognition Model Based on Diversity Measurement Cluster [J]. Computer Science, 2018, 45(1): 307-312.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!