A compressed breadth-first search for satisfiability

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2409, Issue , 2002, Pages 29-42

  Motter, DoRon B ^a   Markov, Igor L ^a  

^a University of Michigan   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DELAY LOCK LOOPS; FORMAL LOGIC; BINARY DECISION DIAGRAMS; EMBEDDED SYSTEMS;

BOOLEAN SATISFIABILITY; BREADTH-FIRST SEARCH; EXPONENTIAL TIME; IMPLICIT REPRESENTATION; SATISFIABILITY; SEARCH SPACES; TREE TRAVERSAL; ZERO-SUPPRESSED BINARY DECISION DIAGRAMS; SAT INSTANCES;

BINARY DECISION DIAGRAMS; ALGORITHMS;

EID: 84929081034     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45643-0_3     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. F. A. Aloul, I. L. Markov, and K. A. Sakallah. Faster SAT and Smaller BDDs via Common Function Structure. Proc. Intl. Conf. Computer-Aided Design, 2001.
2. F. A. Aloul, M. Mneimneh, and K. A. Sakallah. Backtrack Search Using ZBDDs. Intl. Workshop on Logic and Synthesis, (IWLS), 2001.
3. P. Beame and R. Karp. The efficiency of resolution and Davis-Putnam procedures. submitted for publication.
4. P. Chatalic and L. Simon. Multi-Resolution on Compressed Sets of Clauses. Proc. of 12th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI-2000), November 2000.
5. P. Chatalic and L. Simon. ZRes: the old DP meets ZBDDs. Proc. of the 17th Conf. of Autom. Deduction (CADE), 2000.
6. M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. Loveland. A Machine Program for Theorem Proving. Comm. ACM, 5:394–397, 1962.
7. M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. Jounal of the ACM, 7:201–215, 1960.
8. P. Ferragina and G. Manzini. An experimental study of a compressed index. Proc. 12th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), 2001.
9. R. Gasser. Harnessing Computational Resources for Efficient Exhaustive Search. PhD thesis, Swiss Fed Inst Tech, Zurich, 1994.
10. R. L. Graham, M. Grötschel, and L. Lovász, editors. Handbook of Combinatorics. MIT Press, January 1996.
11. J. F. Groote and H. Zantema. Resolution and binary decision diagrams cannot simulate each other polynomially. Technical Report UU-CS-2000-14, Utrecht University, 2000.
12. A. San Miguel. Random 3-SAT and BDDs: The Plot Thickens Further. CP, 2001.
13. S. Minato. Zero-Suppressed BDDs for Set Manipulation in Combinatorial Problems. 30th ACM/IEEE DAC, 1993.
14. A. Mishchenko. An Introduction to Zero-Suppressed Binary Decision Diagrams. http://www.ee.pdx.edu/˜alanmi/research/.
15. A. Mishchenko. EXTRA v. 1.3: Software Library Extending CUDD Package: Release 2.3.x. http://www.ee.pdx.edu/˜alanmi/research/extra.htm.
16. M. Moskewicz et al. Chaff: Engineering an Efficient SAT Solver. Proc. of IEEE/ACM DAC, pages 530–535, 2001.
17. J. P. Marques Silva and K. A. Sakallah. GRASP: A new search algorithm for satisfiability. ICCAD, 1996.
18. F. Somenzi. CUDD: CU Decision Diagram Package Release 2.3.1. http://vlsi.colorado.edu/˜fabio/CUDD/cuddIntro.html.
19. T. E. Uribe and M. E. Stickel. Ordered binary decision diagrams and the Davis-Putnam procedure. In J. P. Jouannaud, editor, 1st Intl. Conf. on Constraints in Comp. Logics, volume 845 of LNCS, pages 34–49. Springer, September 1994.
20. A. Urquhart. Hard examples for resolution. Journal of the ACM, 34, 1987.