Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
C. Sinz, W. Blochinger, W. Küchlin (2001)
PaSAT - Parallel SAT-Checking with Lemma Exchange: Implementation and ApplicationsElectron. Notes Discret. Math., 9
O. Coudert, J. Madre (1995)
New Ideas for Solving Covering Problems32nd Design Automation Conference
D. Pretolani (1993)
Efficiency and stability of hypergraph SAT algorithms
J. Freeman (1995)
Improvements to propositional satisfiability search algorithms
Joao Marques-Silva, K. Sakallah (1996)
GRASP-A new search algorithm for satisfiabilityProceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided Design
R. Stallman, G. Sussman (1976)
Forward Reasoning and Dependency-Directed Backtracking in a System for Computer-Aided Circuit AnalysisArtif. Intell., 9
M. Moskewicz, Conor Madigan, Ya-Fan Zhao, Li-j. Zhang, S. Malik (2001)
Engineering a (super?) efficient sat solver
Chu Li, Anbulagan (1997)
Look-Ahead Versus Look-Back for Satisfiability Problems
J. Hooker, V. Vinay (1995)
Branching rules for satisfiabilityJournal of Automated Reasoning, 15
P. Barth (1995)
A Davis-Putnam based enumeration algorithm for linear pseudo-Boolean optimization
C. Gomes, B. Selman (1997)
Algorithm Portfolio Design: Theory vs. PracticeArXiv, abs/1302.1541
M. Moskewicz, Conor Madigan, Ying Zhao, Lintao Zhang, S. Malik (2001)
Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solverProceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232)
Hantao Zhang (1997)
SATO: An Efficient Propositional Prover
Max Böhm, Ewald Speckenmeyer (1996)
A fast parallel SAT-solver — efficient workload balancingAnnals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 17
B. Selman, Henry Kautz (1993)
Domain-Independent Extensions to GSAT: Solving Large Structured Satisfiability Problems
C. Blair, R. Jeroslow, J. Lowe (1986)
Some results and experiments in programming techniques for propositional logicComput. Oper. Res., 13
(1997)
Reasoning in Boolean Networks (Kluwer Academic
G. Gallo, Giampaolo Urbani (1989)
Algorithms for Testing the Satisfiability of Propositional FormulaeJ. Log. Program., 7
P. Stephan, R. Brayton, A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli (1996)
Combinational test generation using satisfiabilityIEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst., 15
Eugene Freuder (1978)
Synthesizing constraint expressionsCommun. ACM, 21
(1995)
A system for determining propositional logic theorems by applying values and rules to triplets that are generated from a formula (1989)
C. Gomes, B. Selman, Henry Kautz (1998)
Boosting Combinatorial Search Through Randomization
R. Bayardo, R. Schrag (1997)
Using CSP Look-Back Techniques to Solve Real-World SAT Instances
W. Kunz, D. Stoffel (1997)
Reasoning in Boolean Networks - Logic Synthesis and Verification Using Testing Techniques
Bart Selman, Hector Levesque, David Mitchell (1992)
A New Method for Solving Hard Satisfiability Problems
Marques-Silva / Backtrack search SAT algorithms
C. Gomes, B. Selman, N. Crato, Henry Kautz (2000)
Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction ProblemsJournal of Automated Reasoning, 24
Luís Baptista, Joao Marques-Silva (2000)
Using Randomization and Learning to Solve Hard Real-World Instances of Satisfiability
Chu Li (2000)
Integrating Equivalency Reasoning into Davis-Putnam Procedure
Sun Kim, Hantao Zhang (1994)
ModGen: Theorem Proving by Model Generation
Martin Davis, G. Logemann, D. Loveland (2011)
A machine program for theorem-provingCommun. ACM, 5
James Crawford, Larry Auton (1993)
Experimental Results on the Crossover Point in Satisfiability Problems
J. Kleer (1987)
An Assumption-Based TMSArtif. Intell., 28
A. Gelder, Yumi Tsuji (1995)
Satisfiability testing with more reasoning and less guessing
R. Dechter (1990)
Enhancement Schemes for Constraint Processing: Backjumping, Learning, and Cutset DecompositionArtif. Intell., 41
(1993)
DIMACS SAT instances available from URL ftp://dimacs
Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge, 1993. (DIMACS benchmarks available from ftp://Dimacs.Rutgers.EDU/pub/challenge/ sat/benchmarks/cnf. UCSC benchmarks available in /pub/ challenge/sat
J. Gaschnig (1979)
Performance measurement and analysis of certain search algorithms.
Hantao Zhang, M. Bonacina, J. Hsiang (1996)
PSATO: a Distributed Propositional Prover and its Application to Quasigroup ProblemsJ. Symb. Comput., 21
(1997)
and R
M. Yokoo (1995)
Asynchronous Weak-commitment Search for Solving Distributed Constraint Satisfaction Problems
T. Schiex, G. Verfaillie (1993)
Nogood Recording for static and dynamic constraint satisfaction problemsProceedings of 1993 IEEE Conference on Tools with Al (TAI-93)
R. Tarjan (1974)
Finding Dominators in Directed GraphsSIAM J. Comput., 3
O. Coudert (1996)
On solving covering problems
R. Zabih, David McAllester (1988)
A Rearrangement Search Strategy for Determining Propositional Satisfiability
Joao Marques-Silva (1995)
Search Algorithms for Satisfiability Problems in Combinational Switching Circuits
R. Jeroslow, Jinchang Wang (1990)
Solving propositional satisfiability problemsAnnals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 1
Martin Davis, H. Putnam (1960)
A Computing Procedure for Quantification TheoryJ. ACM, 7
(1992)
Report on a SAT competition
J. Gu, P. Purdom, J. Franco, B. Wah (1996)
Algorithms for the satisfiability (SAT) problem: A survey
O. Dubois, Pascal André, Yacine Boufkhad, J. Carlier (1993)
SAT versus UNSAT
João Silva, Arlindo Oliveira (1997)
Improving Satisfiability Algorithms with Dominance and Partitioning
David McAllester (1980)
An Outlook on Truth Maintenance.
João Marques-Silva (2000)
Algebraic Simplification Techniques for Propositional Satisfiability
J. Groote, J. Warners (2000)
The Propositional Formula Checker HeerHugoJournal of Automated Reasoning, 24
T. Larrabee (1992)
Test pattern generation using Boolean satisfiabilityIEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst., 11
Propositional Satisfiability (SAT) is often used as the underlying model for a significant number of applications in Artificial Intelligence as well as in other fields of Computer Science and Engineering. Algorithmic solutions for SAT include, among others, local search, backtrack search and algebraic manipulation. In recent years, several different organizations of local search and backtrack search algorithms for SAT have been proposed, in many cases allowing larger problem instances to be solved in different application domains. While local search algorithms have been shown to be particularly useful for random instances of SAT, recent backtrack search algorithms have been used for solving large instances of SAT from real-world applications. In this paper we provide an overview of backtrack search SAT algorithms. We describe and illustrate a number of techniques that have been empirically shown to be highly effective in pruning the amount of search on significant and representative classes of problem instances. In particular, we review strategies for non-chronological backtracking, procedures for clause recording and for the identification of necessary variable assignments, and mechanisms for the structural simplification of instances of SAT.
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence – Springer Journals
Published: Oct 10, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.