Conflict-Driven Satisfiability for Theory Combination: Transition System and Completeness | Journal of Automated Reasoning Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Conflict-Driven Satisfiability for Theory Combination: Transition System and Completeness

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many applications depend on solving the satisfiability of formulæ involving propositional logic and first-order theories, a problem known as Satisfiability Modulo Theory. This article presents a new method for satisfiability modulo a combination of theories, named CDSAT, for Conflict-Driven SATisfiability. CDSAT also solves Satisfiability Modulo Assignment problems that may include assignments to first-order terms. A conflict-driven procedure assigns values to variables to build a model, and performs inferences on demand in order to solve conflicts between assignments and formulæ. CDSAT extends this paradigm to generic combinations of disjoint theories, each characterized by a collection of inference rules called theory module. CDSAT coordinates the theory modules in such a way that the conflict-driven reasoning happens in the union of the theories, not only in propositional logic. As there is no fixed hierarchy with propositional logic at the center and the other theories as satellites, CDSAT offers a flexible framework for model search. We prove the soundness, completeness, and termination of CDSAT, identifying sufficient requirements on theories and modules that ensure these properties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. In fact, it is an inference system in the sense of [12].

  2. \({\textsf {UndoClear}}\) is a renaming of Undo [5].

  3. \({\textsf {UndoDecide}}\) replaces T-backjump-decide [9] or Semantic split [15].

References

  1. Barrett, C.W., Dill, D.L., Stump, A.: A generalization of Shostak’s method for combining decision procedures. In: Armando, A. (ed.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2309, pp. 132–146. Springer, Berlin (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barrett, C.W., Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Splitting on demand in SAT modulo theories. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning (LPAR). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4246, pp. 512–526. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Bobot, F., Graham-Lengrand, S., Marre, B., Bury, G.: Centralizing equality reasoning in MCSAT. Presented at the Sixteenth International Workshop on Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) at the Ninth International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR), July (2018)

  4. Bonacina, M.P.: On conflict-driven reasoning. In: Shankar, N., Dutertre, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Automated Formal Methods (AFM) at the Ninth NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM), Kalpa Publications, vol. 5, pp. 31–49. EasyChair (2018)

  5. Bonacina, M.P., Graham-Lengrand, S., Shankar, N.: Satisfiability modulo theories and assignments. In: de Moura, L. (ed.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 10395, pp. 42–59. Springer, Berlin (2017)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Bonacina, M.P., Graham-Lengrand, S., Shankar, N.: Proofs in conflict-driven theory combination. In: Andronick, J., Felty, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the Seventh ACM International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs (CPP), pp. 186–200. ACM Press, New York (2018)

  7. Bradley, A.R., Manna, Z.: The Calculus of Computation: Decision Procedures with Applications to Verification. Springer, Berlin (2007)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Brummayer, R., Biere, A.: Lemmas on demand for the extensional theory of arrays. J. Satisf. Boolean Model. Comput. 6, 165–201 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. de Moura, L., Jovanović, D.: A model-constructing satisfiability calculus. In: Giacobazzi, R., Berdine, J., Mastroeni, I. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Verification, Model Checking and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7737, pp. 1–12. Springer, Berlin (2013)

  10. de Moura, L., Passmore, G.O.: Exact global optimization on demand (presentation only). In: Ghilardi, S., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V., Tiwari A. (eds.) Notes of the Third Workshop on Automated Deduction: Decidability, Complexity, Tractability (ADDCT), pp. 50–50 (2013). https://userpages.uni-koblenz.de/~sofronie/addct-2013/. Last seen on 19 Dec. 2018

  11. Dutertre, B.: Yices 2.2. In: Biere, A., Bloem, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8559, pp. 737–744. Springer, Berlin, (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Ganzinger, H., Rueß, H., Shankar, N.: Modularity and Refinement in Inference Systems. Technical Report CSL-SRI-04-02, CSL, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, USA (2004)

  13. Jovanović, D: Solving nonlinear integer arithmetic with MCSAT. In: Bouajjani, A., Monniaux, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Verification, Model Checking and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10145, pp. 330–346. Springer, Berlin (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jovanović, D., Barrett, C.W.: Sharing is caring: combination of theories. In: Tinelli, C., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 6989, pp. 195–210. Springer, Berlin (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Jovanović, D., Barrett, C.W., de Moura, L.: The design and implementation of the model-constructing satisfiability calculus. In: Jobstman, B., Ray, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD). ACM and IEEE (2013)

  16. Jovanović, D., de Moura, L.: Cutting to the chase: solving linear integer arithmetic. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 6803, pp. 338–353. Springer, Berlin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jovanović, D., de Moura, L.: Solving non-linear arithmetic. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 7364, pp. 339–354. Springer, Berlin (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Krstić, S., Goel, A.: Architecting solvers for SAT modulo theories: Nelson–Oppen with DPLL. In: Wolter, F. (ed.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4720, pp. 1–27. Springer, Berlin (2007)

  19. Malik, S., Zhang, L.: Boolean satisfiability: from theoretical hardness to practical success. Commun. ACM 52(8), 76–82 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Marques Silva, J.P., Lynce, I., Malik, S.: Conflict-driven clause learning SAT solvers. In: Biere, A., Heule, M., Van Maaren, H., Walsh, T. (eds.) Handbook of Satisfiability, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 185, pp. 131–153. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)

  21. Nelson, G., Oppen, D.C.: Simplification by cooperating decision procedures. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1(2), 245–257 (1979)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Solving SAT and SAT modulo theories: from an abstract Davis–Putnam–Logemann–Loveland procedure to DPLL(T). J. ACM 53(6), 937–977 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Zeljić, A., Wintersteiger, C.M., Rümmer, P.: Deciding bit-vector formulas with mcSAT. In: Creignou, N., Le Berre, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9710, pp. 249–266. Springer, Berlin (2016)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dejan Jovanović for fruitful discussions. Part of this work was done when the first author was visiting the Computer Science Lab of SRI International, whose support is greatly appreciated. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of NSF, DARPA, or the U.S. Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università degli Studi di Verona, Strada Le Grazie 15, 37134, Verona, EU, Italy

    Maria Paola Bonacina

  2. SRI International, 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, USA

    Stéphane Graham-Lengrand & Natarajan Shankar

Authors
  1. Maria Paola Bonacina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stéphane Graham-Lengrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natarajan Shankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Paola Bonacina.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This research was funded in part by NSF Grants 1528153 and CNS-0917375, by DARPA under Agreement Number FA8750-16-C-0043, and by Grant “Ricerca di base 2017” of the Università degli Studi di Verona.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bonacina, M.P., Graham-Lengrand, S. & Shankar, N. Conflict-Driven Satisfiability for Theory Combination: Transition System and Completeness. J Autom Reasoning 64, 579–609 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-018-09510-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-018-09510-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation