Approximating minimal unsatisfiable subformulae by means of adaptive core search

Discrete Applied Mathematics

Volumn 130, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 85-100

  Bruni, Renato ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

(Un)Satisfiability; Consistency restoring; Enumeration

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES;

CONSISTENCY RESTORING;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 0042014224     PISSN: 0166218X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-218X(02)00399-2     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. E. Amaldi, M.E. Pfetsch, L. Trotter Jr., Some structural and algorithmic properties of the maximum feasible subsystem problem, in: Proceedings of the 10th Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization Conference, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1610, Springer, Berlin, 1999, pp. 45-59.
2. R. Battiti, M. Protasi, Approximate algorithms and Heuristics for MAX-SAT, in: D.Z. Du, P.M. Pardalos (Eds.), Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization, Vol. 1, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1998, pp. 77-148.
3. R.J. Bayardo Jr., R.C. Schrag, Using CSP lookback techniques to solve exceptionally hard SAT instances, in: Proceedings of the Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming - CP96, Springer, Berlin, 1996, pp. 46-60.
4. Bertsimas D., Tsitsiklis J.N. Introduction to Linear Optimization. 1997;Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA.
5. Bruni R., Sassano A. Errors detection and correction in large scale data collecting. Hoffmann F.et al. Advances in Intelligent Data Analysis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 2189:2001;84-94 Springer, Berlin.
6. Bryant R.E. Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. C35(8):1986;677-691.
7. Chandru V., Hooker J.N. Optimization Methods for Logical Inference. 1999;Wiley, New York.
8. Chinneck J.W., Dravnieks E.W. Locating Minimal Infeasible Constraint Sets in Linear Programs. ORSA J. Comput. 3:1991;157-168.
9. J. Crawford, L. Auton, Experimental results on the crossover point in Satisfiability problems, in: Proceedings of the AAAI-93, Washington, DC, 1993, pp. 22-28.
10. Davis M., Logemann G., Loveland D. A machine program for theorem-proving. Comm. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 5:1962;394-397.
11. Davis M., Putnam H. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 7:1960;201-215.
12. Dubois O., Andre P., Boufkhad Y., Carlier J. SAT versus UNSAT. DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 26:1996;415-436.
13. H. Fleischner, S. Szeider, Polynomial-time recognition of minimal unsatisfiable formulas with fixed clause-variable difference, ECCC TR-00-049, 2000.
14. Van Gelder A., Tsuji Y.K. Satisfiability testing with more reasoning and less guessing. DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 26:1996;559-586.
15. I.P. Gent, H. van Maaren, T. Walsh (Eds.), SAT 2000, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2000.
16. J. Groote, J. Warners, The propositional formula checker HeerHugo, in: I.P. Gent, H. van Maaren, T. Walsh (Eds.), SAT 2000, IOS, Amsterdam, 2000.
17. Gu J. Optimization algorithms for the satisfiability (SAT) problem. Du Ding-Zhu Advances in Optimization and Approximation. 1994;72-154 Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
18. Gu J., Purdom P.W., Franco J., Wah B.W. Algorithms for the satisfiability (SAT) problem: a survey, DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics. 1999;American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
19. Hooker J.N., Vinay V. Branching rules for satisfiability. J. Automated Reasoning. 15:1995;359-383.
20. Jeroslow R.E., Wang J. Solving propositional satisfiability problems. Ann. Math. AI. 1:1990;167-187.
21. D.S. Johnson, M.A. Trick (Eds.), Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability, DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 26, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996.
22. de Klerk E., van Maaren H., Warners J.P. Relaxations of the satisfiability problem using semidefinite Programming. Gent I.P., van Maaren H., Walsh T. SAT 2000. 2000;IOS Press, Amsterdam.
23. O. Kullmann, An application of matroid theory to the SAT Problem, ECCC TR00-018, 2000.
24. Loveland D.W. Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis. 1978;North-Holland, Amsterdam.
25. C. Mannino, A. Sassano, Augmentation, Local Search and Learning, AI-IA Notizie XIII (2000) 34-36.
26. Marques-Silva J.P., Sakallah K.A. GRASP. a search algorithm for propositional satisfiability IEEE Trans. Comput. 48(5):1999;506-521.
27. n steps Discrete Appl. Math. 10:1985;287-295.
28. Pretolani D. Efficiency and stability of hypergraph SAT algorithms. DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 26:1996;479-498.
29. Stallman R., Sussman G.J. Forward reasoning and dependency directed backtracking. Artif. Intell. 9(2):1977;135-196.
30. G. Stålmarck, M. Säflund, Modeling and verifying systems and software in propositional logic, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Safety of Computer Control Systems, Pergamon, Oxford, 1990, pp. 31-36.
31. Truemper K. Effective Logic Computation. 1998;Wiley, New York.
32. R. Zabih, D. McAllester, A rearrangement search strategy for determining propositional satisfiability, in: Proceedings of the AAAI'88, 1988, pp. 155-160.
33. H. Zhang, SATO: An efficient propositional prover, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-97), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1104, Springer, Berlin, 1997, pp. 308-312.
34. Zhang H., Stickel M.E. Implementing the Davis-Putnam method. Gent I.P., van Maaren H., Walsh T. SAT 2000. 2000;IOS, Amsterdam.