Efficient data structures for backtrack search SAT solvers

Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 43, Issue 1-4, 2005, Pages 137-152

  Lynce, Inês ^a   Marques Silva, João ^a  

^a INESC ID   (Portugal)

Author keywords

backtrack search; propositional satisfiability

Indexed keywords

EID: 10344261575     PISSN: 10122443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10472-005-0425-5     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. F. Bacchus, Exploiting the computational tradeoff of more reasoning and less searching, in: Proceedings of Fifth International Symposium on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (2002) pp. 7-16.
2. L. Baptista and J.P. Marques-Silva, Using randomization and learning to solve hard real-world instances of satisfiability, in: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, ed. R. Dechter, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1894 (2000) pp. 489-494.
3. R. Bayardo, Jr. and R. Schrag, Using CSP look-back techniques to solve real-world SAT instances, in: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1997) pp. 203-208.
4. O. Coudert, On solving covering problems, in: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (1996) pp. 197-202.
5. M. Davis, G. Logemann and D. Loveland, A machine program for theorem-proving, Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 5 (1996) 394-397.
6. M. Davis and H. Putnam, A computing procedure for quantification theory, Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 7 (1960) 201-215.
7. A.V. Gelder and Y.K. Tsuji, Satisfiability testing with more reasoning and less guessing, in: Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge, eds. D.S. Johnson and M.A. Trick (American Mathematical Society, 1993).
8. C.P. Gomes, B. Selman and H. Kautz, Boosting combinatorial search through randomization, in: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1998) pp. 431-437.
9. J.F. Groote and J.P. Warners, The propositional formula Checker Heerhugo, in: Proceedings of SAT 2000, eds. I. Gent, H. van Maaren and T. Walsh (IOS Press, 2000) pp. 261-281.
10. C.M. Li and Anbulagan, Look-ahead versus look-back for satisfiability problems, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (1997) pp. 341-355.
11. J.P. Marques-Silva, Algebraic simplification techniques for propositional satisfiability, in: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, ed. R. Dechter, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1894 (2000) pp. 537-542.
12. J.P. Marques-Silva and K.A. Sakallah, GRASP: A new search algorithm for satisfiability, in: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (1996) pp. 220-227.
13. J.P. Marques-Silva and K.A. Sakallah Boolean satisfiability in electronic design automation, in: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (2000) pp. 675-680.
14. N. Moskewicz, C. Madigan, Y. Zhao, L. Zhang and S. Malik, Engineering an efficient SAT solver, in: Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference (2001) pp. 530-535.
15. B. Selman and H. Kautz, Domain-independent extensions to GSAT: Solving large structured satisfiability problems, in: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1993) pp. 290-295.
16. R. Zabih and D.A. McAllester, A rearrangement search strategy for determining propositional satisfiability, in: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1988) pp. 155-160.
17. H. Zhang, SATO: An efficient propositional prover, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Deduction (1997) pp. 272-275.
18. H. Zhang and M. Stickel, Implementing the Davis-Putnam method, in: Proceedings of SAT 2000, eds. I. Gent, H. van Maaren and T. Walsh (IOS Press, 2000) pp. 309-326.