Boolean satisfiability (SA T) is a fundamental problem in computer science.

We propose a neurosymbolic approach to the explanation of complex sequences of decisions that combines the strengths of decision procedures and Large Language Models (LLMs). We demonstrate this approach by producing explanations for the solutions of Hitori puzzles. The rules of Hitori include local constraints that are effectively explained by short resolution proofs. However, they also include a connectivity constraint that is more suitable for visual explanations. Hence, Hitori provides an excellent testing ground for a flexible combination of SAT solvers and LLMs. We have implemented a tool that assists humans in solving Hitori puzzles, and we present experimental evidence of its effectiveness.

Modern software for propositional satisfiability problems gives a powerful automated reasoning toolkit, capable of outputting not only a satisfiable/unsatisfiable signal but also a justification of unsatisfiability in the form of resolution proof (or a more expressive proof), which is commonly used for verification purposes. Empirically, modern SAT solvers produce relatively short proofs, however, there are no inherent guarantees that these proofs cannot be significantly reduced. This paper proposes a novel branch-and-bound algorithm for finding the shortest resolution proofs; to this end, we introduce a layer list representation of proofs that groups clauses by their level of indirection. As we show, this representation breaks all permutational symmetries, thereby improving upon the state-of-the-art symmetry-breaking and informing the design of a novel workflow for proof minimization. In addition to that, we design pruning procedures that reason on proof length lower bound, clause subsumption, and dominance. Our experiments suggest that the proofs from state-of-the-art solvers could be shortened by 30-60% on the instances from SAT Competition 2002 and by 25-50% on small synthetic formulas. When treated as an algorithm for finding the shortest proof, our approach solves twice as many instances as the previous work based on SAT solving and reduces the time to optimality by orders of magnitude for the instances solved by both approaches.

We introduce NeuRes, a neuro-symbolic proof-based SAT solver. Unlike other neural SAT solving methods, NeuRes is capable of proving unsatisfiability as opposed to merely predicting it. By design, NeuRes operates in a certificate-driven fashion by employing propositional resolution to prove unsatisfiability and to accelerate the process of finding satisfying truth assignments in case of unsat and sat formulas, respectively. To realize this, we propose a novel architecture that adapts elements from Graph Neural Networks and Pointer Networks to autoregressively select pairs of nodes from a dynamic graph structure, which is essential to the generation of resolution proofs. Our model is trained and evaluated on a dataset of teacher proofs and truth assignments that we compiled with the same random formula distribution used by NeuroSAT. In our experiments, we show that NeuRes solves more test formulas than NeuroSAT by a rather wide margin on different distributions while being much more data-efficient. Furthermore, we show that NeuRes is capable of largely shortening teacher proofs by notable proportions. We use this feature to devise a bootstrapped training procedure that manages to reduce a dataset of proofs generated by an advanced solver by ~23% after training on it with no extra guidance.

A CNF formula is harder than another CNF formula with the same number of clauses if it requires a longer resolution proof. In this paper, we introduce resolution hardness numbers; they give for m 1, 2,... the length of a shortest proof of a hardest formula on m clauses. We compute the first ten resolution hardness numbers, along with the corresponding hardest formulas. To achieve this, we devise a candidate filtering and symmetry breaking search scheme for limiting the number of potential candidates for hardest formulas, and an efficient SAT encoding for computing a shortest resolution proof of a given candidate formula.

A Boolean formula in conjunctive normal form (CNF) is called matched if the system of sets of variables which appear in individual clauses has a system of distinct representatives. Each matched CNF is trivially satisfiable (each clause can be satisfied by its representative variable). Another property which is easy to see, is that the class of matched CNFs is not closed under partial assignment of truth values to variables. This latter property leads to a fact (proved here) that given two matched CNFs it is co-NP complete to decide whether they are logically equivalent. The construction in this proof leads to another result: a much shorter and simpler proof of the fact that the Boolean minimization problem for matched CNFs is a complete problem for the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. The main result of this paper deals with the structure of clause minimum CNFs. We prove here that if a Boolean function f admits a representation by a matched CNF then every clause minimum CNF representation of f is matched.

This paper proposes the integration of the resolution rule for Max-SAT with unsatisfiability-based Max-SAT solvers. First, we show that the resolution rule for Max-SAT can be safely applied as dictated by the resolution proof associated with an unsatisfiable core when such proof is read-once, that is, each clause is used at most once in the resolution process. Second, we study how this property can be integrated in an unsatisfiability-based solver. In particular, the resolution rule for Max-SAT is applied to read-once proofs or to read-once subparts of a general proof. Finally, we perform an empirical investigation on structured instances from recent Max-SAT evaluations. Preliminary results show that the use of read-once resolution substantially improves the performance of the solver.

Modern complete SAT solvers almost uniformly implement variations of the clause learning framework introduced by Grasp and Chaff. The success of these solvers has been theoretically explained by showing that the clause learning framework is an implementation of a proof system which is as poweful as resolution. However, exponential lower bounds are known for resolution, which suggests that significant advances in SAT solving must come from implementations of more powerful proof systems. We present a clause learning SAT solver that uses extended resolution. It is based on a restriction of the application of the extension rule. This solver outperforms existing solvers on application instances from recent SAT competitions as well as on instances that are provably hard for resolution.

We describe a variant of resolution rule of proof and show that it is complete for stable semantics of logic programs. We show applications of this result.