Abstract
High-performance SAT solvers based on systematic search generally use either conflict driven clause learning (CDCL) or lookahead techniques to gain efficiency. Both styles of reasoning can gain from a preprocessing phase in which some form of deduction is used to simplify the problem. In this paper we undertake an empirical examination of the effects of several recently proposed preprocessors on both CDCL and lookahead-based SAT solvers. One finding is that the use of multiple preprocessors one after the other can be much more effective than using any one of them alone, but that the order in which they are applied is significant. We intend our results to be particularly useful to those implementing new preprocessors and solvers.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 100-116 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | CEUR Workshop Proceedings |
Volume | 212 |
Publication status | Published - 2006 |
Event | 6th International Workshop on the Implementation of Logics, IWIL 2006 - Held at the 13th International Conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning - Phnom Penh, Cambodia Duration: 13 Nov 2006 → 17 Nov 2006 |