Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

The SAT-based approach to the decision problem for expressive, decidable, quantifier-free first-order theories has been investigated with remarkable results at least since 1993. One such theory, successfully employed in the formal verification of complex, infinite state systems, is Separation Logic (SL), which combines Boolean logic with arithmetic constraints of the form − ⋈ , where ⋈ is ≤, <, >, ≥, =, or ≠. The SAT-based approach to SL was first proposed and implemented in 1999: the results in terms of performance were good, and since then a number of other systems for SL have appeared. In this paper we focus on the problem of building efficient SAT-based decision procedures for SL. We present the basic procedure and four optimizations that improve dramatically its effectiveness in most cases: (a) preprocessing, (b) early pruning, (c) model reduction, and (d) best reason detection. For each technique we give an example of how it might improve the performance. Furthermore, for the first three techniques, we give a pseudo-code representation and formally state the soundness and completeness of the resulting optimized procedure. We also show how it is possible to check the satisfiability of valuations involving constraints of the form − < using the Bellman-Ford algorithm. Lastly, we present an extensive comparative experimental analysis, showing that our solver TSAT++, built along the lines described in this paper, is currently the state of the art on various classes of problems, including randomly generated, hand-made, and real-world instances.

Recent improvements in propositional satisfiability techniques (SAT) made it possible to tackle successfully some hard real-world problems (e.g., model-checking, circuit testing, propositional planning) by encoding into SAT. However, a purely Boolean representation is not expressive enough for many other real-world applications, including the verification of timed and hybrid systems, of proof obligations in software, and of circuit design at RTL level. These problems can be naturally modeled as satisfiability in linear arithmetic logic (LAL), that is, the Boolean combination of propositional variables and linear constraints over numerical variables. In this paper we present SAT, a new, SAT-based decision procedure for LAL, based on the (known approach) of integrating a state-of-the-art SAT solver with a dedicated mathematical solver for LAL. We improve SAT in two different directions. First, the top-level line procedure is enhanced and now features a tighter integration between the Boolean search and the mathematical solver. In particular, we allow for theory-driven backjumping and learning, and theory-driven deduction; we use static learning in order to reduce the number of Boolean models that are mathematically inconsistent; we exploit problem clustering in order to partition mathematical reasoning; and we define a stack-based interface that allows us to implement mathematical reasoning in an incremental and backtrackable way. Second, the mathematical solver is based on layering; that is, the consistency of (partial) assignments is checked in theories of increasing strength (equality and uninterpreted functions, linear arithmetic over the reals, linear arithmetic over the integers). For each of these layers, a dedicated (sub)solver is used. Cheaper solvers are called first, and detection of inconsistency makes call of the subsequent solvers superfluous. We provide a through experimental evaluation of our approach, by taking into account a large set of previously proposed benchmarks. We first investigate the relative benefits and drawbacks of each proposed technique by comparison with respect to a reference option setting. We then demonstrate the global effectiveness of our approach by a comparison with several state-of-the-art decision procedures. We show that the behavior of SAT is often superior to its competitors, both on LAL and in the subclass of difference logic.