Cargando…
Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics
CDCL-based SAT solvers have transformed the field of automated reasoning owing to their demonstrated efficiency at handling problems arising from diverse domains. The success of CDCL solvers is owed to the design of clever heuristics that enable the tight coupling of different components. One of the...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326467/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51825-7_6 |
_version_ | 1783552349999988736 |
---|---|
author | Shaw, Arijit Meel, Kuldeep S. |
author_facet | Shaw, Arijit Meel, Kuldeep S. |
author_sort | Shaw, Arijit |
collection | PubMed |
description | CDCL-based SAT solvers have transformed the field of automated reasoning owing to their demonstrated efficiency at handling problems arising from diverse domains. The success of CDCL solvers is owed to the design of clever heuristics that enable the tight coupling of different components. One of the core components is phase selection, wherein the solver, during branching, decides the polarity of the branch to be explored for a given variable. Most of the state-of-the-art CDCL SAT solvers employ phase-saving as a phase selection heuristic, which was proposed to address the potential inefficiencies arising from far-backtracking. In light of the emergence of chronological backtracking in CDCL solvers, we re-examine the efficiency of phase saving. Our empirical evaluation leads to a surprising conclusion: The usage of saved phase and random selection of polarity for decisions following a chronological backtracking leads to an indistinguishable runtime performance in terms of instances solved and PAR-2 score. We introduce Decaying Polarity Score (DPS) to capture the trend of the polarities attained by the variable, and upon observing lack of performance improvement due to DPS, we turn to a more sophisticated heuristic seeking to capture the activity of literals and the trend of polarities: Literal State Independent Decaying Sum (LSIDS). We find the 2019 winning SAT solver, Maple_LCM_Dist_ChronoBTv3, augmented with LSIDS solves 6 more instances while achieving a reduction of over 125 seconds in PAR-2 score, a significant improvement in the context of the SAT competition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7326467 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73264672020-07-01 Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics Shaw, Arijit Meel, Kuldeep S. Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2020 Article CDCL-based SAT solvers have transformed the field of automated reasoning owing to their demonstrated efficiency at handling problems arising from diverse domains. The success of CDCL solvers is owed to the design of clever heuristics that enable the tight coupling of different components. One of the core components is phase selection, wherein the solver, during branching, decides the polarity of the branch to be explored for a given variable. Most of the state-of-the-art CDCL SAT solvers employ phase-saving as a phase selection heuristic, which was proposed to address the potential inefficiencies arising from far-backtracking. In light of the emergence of chronological backtracking in CDCL solvers, we re-examine the efficiency of phase saving. Our empirical evaluation leads to a surprising conclusion: The usage of saved phase and random selection of polarity for decisions following a chronological backtracking leads to an indistinguishable runtime performance in terms of instances solved and PAR-2 score. We introduce Decaying Polarity Score (DPS) to capture the trend of the polarities attained by the variable, and upon observing lack of performance improvement due to DPS, we turn to a more sophisticated heuristic seeking to capture the activity of literals and the trend of polarities: Literal State Independent Decaying Sum (LSIDS). We find the 2019 winning SAT solver, Maple_LCM_Dist_ChronoBTv3, augmented with LSIDS solves 6 more instances while achieving a reduction of over 125 seconds in PAR-2 score, a significant improvement in the context of the SAT competition. 2020-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7326467/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51825-7_6 Text en © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Article Shaw, Arijit Meel, Kuldeep S. Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title | Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title_full | Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title_fullStr | Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title_full_unstemmed | Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title_short | Designing New Phase Selection Heuristics |
title_sort | designing new phase selection heuristics |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326467/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51825-7_6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shawarijit designingnewphaseselectionheuristics AT meelkuldeeps designingnewphaseselectionheuristics |