GUNSAT: A greedy local search algorithm for unsatisfiability

IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 2256-2261

  Audemard, Gilles ^a   Simon, Laurent ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ D'ARTOIS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPLETE SEARCH; HIGH-LEVEL REASONING; INTRINSIC LIMIT; LOCAL SEARCH ALGORITHM; LOCAL-SEARCH ALGORITHMS; RESOLUTION PROOFS; SATISFIABILITY TESTING; UNIT PROPAGATION;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; FORMAL LOGIC;

LEARNING ALGORITHMS;

EID: 84880860226     PISSN: 10450823     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. F. Bacchus. Enhancing davis putnam with extended binary clause reasoning. In proceedings of AAAI, pages 613-619, 2002.
2. V. Chvátal and E. Szemerédi. Many hard examples for resolution. Journal of the ACM, 35:759-768, 1988.
3. M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. Journal of the ACM, pages 201-215, 1960.
4. M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. Loveland. A machine program for theorem-proving. Communications of the ACM, 5(7):394-397, July 1962.
5. R. Dechter and I. Rish. Directional resolution: the davis-putnam procedure, revisited. In proceedings of KR, pages 134-145, 1994.
6. O. Dubois and G. Dequen. A backbone-search heuristic for efficient solving of hard 3-sat formulae. In Proceedings of IJCAI, 2001.
7. N. Eén and A. Biere. Effective preprocessing in sat through variable and clause elimination. In in proceedings of SAT, pages 61-75, 2005.
8. H. Fang and W. Ruml. Complete local search for propositional satisfiability. In proceedings of AAAI, pages 161-166, 2004.
9. I. Gent, H. Hoos, A. Rowley, and K. Smyth. Using stochastic local search to solve quantified boolean formulae. In Proc.of CP, pages 348-362, 2003.
10. A. Haken. The intractability of resolution. Theorical Computer Science, 39:297-308, 1985.
11. H. Hoos and T. Stutzle. Stochastic Local Search, Foundations and Applications. Morgan Kaufmann / Elsevier, 2004.
12. D. LeBerre and L. Simon, editors. Special Volume on the SAT 2005 competitions and evaluations, volume 2. Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation, 2006.
13. D. LeBerre. Exploiting the real power of unit propagation lookahead. In Proceedings of SAT, 2001.
14. M. Moskewicz, C. Madigan, Y. Zhao, L. Zhang, and S. Malik. Chaff: Engineering an efficient sat solver. In Proceedings of DAC, pages 530-535, 2001.
15. S. Prestwich and I. Lynce. Local search for unsatisfiability. In Proceedings of SAT, pages 283-296, 2006.
16. J. Robinson. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. JACM, 12:23-41, 1965.
17. B. Selman, H. Levesque, and D. Mitchell. A New Method for Solving Hard Satisfiability Problems. In Proceedings of AAAI, pages 440-446, 1994.
18. B. Selman, H. Kautz, and D. McAllester. Ten challenges in propositional reasoning and search. In Proc. of IJCAI, pages 50-54, 1997.
19. H. Shen and H. Zhang. Another complete local search method for sat. In in proceedings of LPAR, pages 595-605, 2005.
20. L. Simon and A. del Val. Efficient consequence finding. In proceedings of IJCAI, pages 359-365, 2001.
21. G. Stålmarck. A system for determining propositional logic theorem by applying values and rules to triplets that are generated from a formula. US Patent 5,276,897; Canadian Patent 2,018,828; European Patent 0 403 545; Swedish Patent 467 076, 1994.
22. G. Tseitin. On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. Studies in Constructive Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, 2:466-483, 1970.
23. A. Urquhart. Hard examples for resolution. JACM, 34(1):209-219, 1987.
24. L. Zhang. On subsumption removal and on the fly cnf simplification. In proceedings of SAT, volume 3569 of LNCS, pages 482-489, 2005.