skip to main content
article
Public Access

Query-guided maximum satisfiability

Published:11 January 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We propose a new optimization problem "Q-MaxSAT", an extension of the well-known Maximum Satisfiability or MaxSAT problem. In contrast to MaxSAT, which aims to find an assignment to all variables in the formula, Q-MaxSAT computes an assignment to a desired subset of variables (or queries) in the formula. Indeed, many problems in diverse domains such as program reasoning, information retrieval, and mathematical optimization can be naturally encoded as Q-MaxSAT instances. We describe an iterative algorithm for solving Q-MaxSAT. In each iteration, the algorithm solves a subproblem that is relevant to the queries, and applies a novel technique to check whether the partial assignment found is a solution to the Q-MaxSAT problem. If the check fails, the algorithm grows the subproblem with a new set of clauses identified as relevant to the queries. Our empirical evaluation shows that our Q-MaxSAT solver Pilot achieves significant improvements in runtime and memory consumption over conventional MaxSAT solvers on several Q-MaxSAT instances generated from real-world problems in program analysis and information retrieval.

References

  1. AI Genealogy Project. http://aigp.eecs.umich.edu.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. DBLP: computer science bibliography. http://http://dblp.uni-trier.de.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Max-SAT Evaluation. http://www.maxsat.udl.cat/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. C. Ans´otegui, M. L. Bonet, and J. Levy. SAT-based MaxSAT algorithms. Artificial Intelligence, 196:77–105, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Aref, B. Kimelfeld, E. Pasalic, and N. Vasiloglou. Extending datalog with analytics in LogicBlox. In Proceedings of the 9th Alberto Mendelzon International Workshop on Foundations of Data Management, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. T. Ball and S. Rajamani. The SLAM project: Debugging system software via static analysis. In POPL, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. M. Bilenko and R. J. Mooney. Adaptive duplicate detection using learnable string similarity measures. In SIGKDD, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. N. Bjorner and N. Narodytska. Maximum satisfiability using cores and correction sets. In IJCAI, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. N. Bjorner and A.-D. Phan. νz: Maximal satisfaction with Z3. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Symbolic Computation in Software Science (SCSS), 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. M. Blackburn, R. Garner, C. Hoffman, A. M. Khan, K. S. McKinley, R. Bentzur, A. Diwan, D. Feinberg, D. Frampton, S. Z. Guyer, M. Hirzel, A. Hosking, M. Jump, H. Lee, J. E. B. Moss, A. Phansalkar, D. Stefanovi´c, T. VanDrunen, D. von Dincklage, and B. Wiedermann. The DaCapo benchmarks: Java benchmarking development and analysis. In OOPSLA, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Chaganty, A. Lal, A. Nori, and S. Rajamani. Combining relational learning with SMT solvers using CEGAR. In CAV, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. E. Clarke, O. Grumberg, S. Jha, Y. Lu, and H. Veith. Counterexampleguided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking. JACM, 50(5), 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. S. A. Cook. The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. In STOC, 1971. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. P. Domingos, S. Kok, D. Lowd, H. Poon, M. Richardson, and P. Singla. Markov logic. In Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. L. Getoor and B. Taskar. Introduction to Statistical Relational Learning (Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning). The MIT Press, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Gracca, I. Lynce, J. Marques-Silva, and A. L. Oliveira. Efficient and accurate haplotype inference by combining parsimony and pedigree information. In International Conference on Algebraic and Numeric Biology (ANB), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. Gu, P. W. Purdom, J. Franco, and B. W. Wah. Algorithms for the satisfiability (SAT) problem: A survey. In DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, pages 19– 152. American Mathematical Society, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S. Guyer and C. Lin. Client-driven pointer analysis. In SAS, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. T. Henzinger, R. Jhala, R. Majumdar, and G. Sutre. Software verification with BLAST. In SPIN Workshop on Model Checking of Software, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. F. Heras, A. Morgado, and J. Marques-Silva. Core-guided binary search algorithms for maximum satisfiability. In AAAI, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. S. Horwitz, T. W. Reps, and D. Binkley. Interprocedural slicing using dependence graphs. In PLDI, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Ignatiev, A. Morgado, V. M. Manquinho, I. Lynce, and J. Marques-Silva. Progression in maximum satisfiability. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. M. Janota. MiFuMax — a literate MaxSAT solver, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Jose and R. Majumdar. Bug-assist: Assisting fault localization in ANSI-C programs. In CAV, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Jose and R. Majumdar. Cause clue clauses: error localization using maximum satisfiability. In PLDI, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. F. Juma, E. I. Hsu, and S. A. McIlraith. Preference-based planning via MaxSAT. In Proceedings of the Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. H. Kautz, B. Selman, and Y. Jiang. A general stochastic approach to solving problems with hard and soft constraints. In The Satisfiability Problem: Theory and Applications, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. A. Kimmig, S. H. Bach, M. Broecheler, B. Huang, and L. Getoor. A short introduction to probabilistic soft logic. In NIPS Workshop on Probabilistic Programming: Foundations and Applications, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. S. Kok, M. Sumner, M. Richardson, P. Singla, H. Poon, D. Lowd, and P. Domingos. The Alchemy system for statistical relational AI. Technical report, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2007. http://alchemy.cs.washington.edu.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. D. Larraz, A. Oliveras, E. Rodr´ıguez-Carbonell, and A. Rubio. Proving termination of imperative programs using Max-SMT. In FMCAD, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. D. Larraz, K. Nimkar, A. Oliveras, E. Rodr´ıguez-Carbonell, and A. Rubio. Proving non-termination using Max-SMT. In CAV, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. O. Lhoták. Spark: A flexible points-to analysis framework for Java. Master’s thesis, McGill University, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Y. Li, A. Albarghouthi, Z. Kincaid, A. Gurfinkel, and M. Chechik. Symbolic optimization with SMT solvers. In POPL, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. P. Liang and M. Naik. Scaling abstraction refinement via pruning. In PLDI, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. R. Mangal, X. Zhang, A. Nori, and M. Naik. A user-guided approach to program analysis. In FSE, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. R. Mangal, X. Zhang, A. Nori, and M. Naik. Volt: A lazy grounding framework for solving very large MaxSAT instances. In SAT, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. J. Marques-Silva and J. Planes. Algorithms for maximum satisfiability using unsatisfiable cores. In DATE, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. J. Marques-Silva, F. Heras, M. Janota, A. Previti, and A. Belov. On computing minimal correction subsets. In IJCAI, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. R. Martins, S. Joshi, V. M. Manquinho, and I. Lynce. Incremental cardinality constraints for MaxSAT. In CP, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. S. Miyazaki, K. Iwama, and Y. Kambayashi. Database queries as combinatorial optimization problems. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Cooperative Database Systems for Advanced Applications (CODAS), 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. A. Morgado, F. Heras, M. Liffiton, J. Planes, and J. Marques-Silva. Iterative and core-guided MaxSAT solving: A survey and assessment. Constraints, 18(4), 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. A. Morgado, C. Dodaro, and J. Marques-Silva. Core-guided MaxSAT with soft cardinality constraints. In CP, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. M. Naik, A. Aiken, and J. Whaley. Effective static race detection for Java. In PLDI, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. N. Narodytska and F. Bacchus. Maximum satisfiability using coreguided MaxSAT resolution. In AAAI, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. F. Niu, C. Ré, A. Doan, and J. W. Shavlik. Tuffy: Scaling up statistical inference in markov logic networks using an RDBMS. In VLDB, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. J. Noessner, M. Niepert, and H. Stuckenschmidt. RockIt: Exploiting parallelism and symmetry for MAP inference in statistical relational models. In AAAI, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. C. H. Papadimitriou. Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. M. Richardson and P. Domingos. Markov logic networks. Machine Learning, 62(1-2), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. S. Riedel. Improving the accuracy and efficiency of MAP inference for Markov Logic. In UAI, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. M. Sridharan and R. Bod´ık. Refinement-based context-sensitive points-to analysis for Java. In PLDI, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. M. Sridharan, D. Gopan, L. Shan, and R. Bod´ık. Demand-driven points-to analysis for Java. In OOPSLA, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. D. M. Strickland, E. R. Barnes, and J. S. Sokol. Optimal protein structure alignment using maximum cliques. Operations Research, 53(3):389–402, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. M. Vasquez and J. Hao. A ”logic-constrained” knapsack formulation and a tabu algorithm for the daily photograph scheduling of an earth observation satellite. Comp. Opt. and Appl., 20(2):137–157, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. V. V. Vazirani. Approximation algorithms. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. W. Y. Wang, K. Mazaitis, N. Lao, T. M. Mitchell, and W. W. Cohen. Efficient inference and learning in a large knowledge base: Reasoning with extracted information using a locally groundable first-order probabilistic logic. Machine Learning Journal, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. H. Xu, R. A. Rutenbar, and K. A. Sakallah. sub-SAT: a formulation for relaxed boolean satisfiability with applications in routing. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Physical Design (ISPD), 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Q. Yang, K. Wu, and Y. Jiang. Learning action models from plan examples using weighted MAX-SAT. Artificial Intelligence, 171(2- 3):107–143, Feb. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. X. Zhang, R. Mangal, R. Grigore, M. Naik, and H. Yang. On abstraction refinement for program analyses in Datalog. In PLDI, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Query-guided maximum satisfiability

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!