A hybrid approach for SAT

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

Volumn 2470, Issue , 2002, Pages 172-184

  Habet, Djamal ^a   Li, Chu Min ^b   Devendeville, Laure ^b   Vasquez, Michel ^a  

^a ECOLE DES MINES D ALÈS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE PICARDIE JULES VERNE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; CONSTRAINT THEORY; FORESTRY; LEARNING ALGORITHMS; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

BRANCHING RULES; DPLL PROCEDURE; HYBRID APPROACH; IMPLICATION GRAPHS; LOCAL SEARCH ALGORITHM; SEARCH TREES; STRONGLY CONNECTED COMPONENT; VARIABLE DEPENDENCIES;

LOCAL SEARCH (OPTIMIZATION);

EID: 84957006682     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-46135-3_12     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Y. Asahiro, K. Iwama, and E. Miyano. Random Generation of Test Instances with Controlled Attributes. In D. S.Johnson and M. A.Trick, editors, Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability; The Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge, volume 26, pages 377–394, 1996.
2. L. Brisoux Devendeville, L. Säıs, and E. Grégoire. Recherche locale: vers une exploitation des propriétés structurelles. In proceedings of JNPC’2000, pages 243– 244, Marseille, France, 2000.
3. S. Cook. The Complexity of Theorem Proving Procedures. In Proceeding oh the Third Annual ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 151–158, 1971.
4. J. M. Crawford and L. D. Auton. Experimental Results on the Crosover Point in Random 3-SAT. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 81(1-2):31–57, 1996.
5. M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. Loveland. A Machine Program for Theorem Proving. In Communication of ACM Journal, volume 5(7), pages 394–397, July 1962.
6. F. J. Ferguson and T. Larrabee. Test Pattern Generation for Realistic Bridging Faults in CMOS ICS. In Proceedings of the International Testing Conference, pages 492–499, 1991.
7. J. W. Freeman. Improvements to Propostional Satisfiability Search Algorithms. PhD thesis, Departement of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1995.
8. J. W. Freeman. Hard Random 3-SAT Problems and the Davis-Putnam Procedure. In Artificial Intelligence Journal, pages 81:183–198, 1996.
9. M. L. Ginsberg. Dynamic backtracking. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 1:25–46, 1993.
10. M. L. Ginsberg and D. A. McAllester. GSAT and Dynamic Backtracking. In P. Torasso, J. Doyle, and E. Sandewall, editors, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning KR’94, pages 226–237. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.
11. F. Glover and M. Laguna. Tabu Search. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.
12. J. Gu. Efficient Local Search for Very Large-Scale Satisfiability problems. In ACM SIGART Bulletin, pages 3(1):8–12, 1992.
13. H. H. Hoos and T. Stutzle. Local search algorithms for SAT: An empirical evaluation. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 24(4):421–481, 2000
14. N. Jussien and O. Lhomme. Local search with constraint propagation and conflictbased heuristics. In Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’2000), pages 169–174, Austin, TX, USA, August 2000.
15. H. Kautz, D. McAllester, and B. Selman. Encoding Plans in Propositional Logic. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR’96, pages 374–384, 1996.
16. H. Kautz and B. Selman. Pushing the Envelope: Planning, Propositional Logic, and Stochastic Search. In Howard Shrobe and Ted Senator, editors, Proceedings of the 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the 8th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, pages 1194–1201, Menlo Park, California, 1996
17. J. Lang and P. Marquis. Complexity Results for Independence and Definability in Propositional Logic. In A. G. Cohn, L. K. Schubert, and S. C. Shapiro, editors, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representataion and Reasoning, KR’98, pages 356–367, 1998.
18. T. Larrabee. Test Pattern Generation Using Boolean Satisfiability. In IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, pages 11(1):6–22, 1992.
19. C. M. Li. Exploiting Yet More the Power of Unit Clause Propagation to solve 3-SAT Problem. In ECAI’96 Workshop on Advances in Propositional Deduction, pages 11–16, Budapest, Hungray, 1996
20. C. M. Li and Anbulagan. Heuristic Based on Unit Propagation for Satisfiability. In Proceedings of CP’97, Springer-Verlag, LNCS 1330, pages 342–356, Austria, 1997.
21. B. Mazure, L. Säıs, and E. Grégoire. Boosting Complete Techniques Thanks to Local Search. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 22(3-4):319–331, 1998.
22. D. McAllester, B. Selman, and H. Kautz. Evidence for Invariants in Local Search. In Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI’97, pages 321–326, Providence, Rhode Island, 1997. MIT Press
23. B. Selman, H. Kautz, and B. Cohen. Noise Strategies for Improving Local Search. In MIT press, editor, Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence AAAI’94, volume 1, pages 337–343, 1994.
24. B. Selman, H. Kautz, and D. McAllester. Ten Challenges in Propositional August 1997.
25. B. Selman, H. J. Levesque, and D. Mitchell. A New Method for Solving Hard Satisfiability Problems. In Paul Rosenbloom and Peter Szolovits, editors, Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI’92, pages 440–446, Menlo Park, California, 1992
26. M. N. Velev and R. E. Bryant. Superscalar processor verification using efficient reductions of the logic of equality with uninterpreted functions to propositional logic. In Correct Hardware Design and Verification Methods, CHARME’99, 1999.
27. H. Zhang and M. E. Stickel. Implementing the davis-putnam method. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 24(1):277–296, 2000.