Effective Encodings of Constraint Programming Models to SMT

ProB provides a constraint solver for the B-method written in Prolog and can make use of different backends based on SAT and SMT solving. One such backend translates B and Event-B operators to SMT-LIB using the Z3 solver. This translation uses quantifiers to axiomatize some operators, which are not well-handled by Z3. Several relational constraints such as the transitive closure are not supported by this translation. In this article, we substantially improve the translation to SMT-LIB by employing a more constructive rather than axiomatized style using Z3’s lambda function. Thereby, we are able both to translate more B and Event-B operators to SMT-LIB and improve the overall performance. We further extend ProB’s interface to Z3 to run different solver configurations in parallel. In addition, we present a direct implementation of SMT solving in Prolog using ProB’s constraint solver as a theory solver. We hereby aim to combine the strengths of conflict-driven clause learning for identifying contradictions with ProB’s constraint solver for finding solutions. We deem this implementation to be worthwhile since ProB’s constraint solver is tailored toward solving B and Event-B constraints, and we herewith avoid the dependency on an external SMT solver. Empirical results show that the new integration of Z3 has improved performance of constraint solving and enables to solve several constraints which cannot be solved by ProB’s constraint solver. Furthermore, the direct implementation of SMT solving in ProB shows benefits compared to ProB’s constraint solver and the integration of Z3.

show abstract

Learning to select SAT encodings for pseudo-Boolean and linear integer constraints

Ulrich-Oltean,

Nightingale,

Walker

2023

Constraints

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many constraint satisfaction and optimisation problems can be solved effectively by encoding them as instances of the Boolean Satisfiability problem (SAT). However, even the simplest types of constraints have many encodings in the literature with widely varying performance, and the problem of selecting suitable encodings for a given problem instance is not trivial. We explore the problem of selecting encodings for pseudo-Boolean and linear constraints using a supervised machine learning approach. We show that it is possible to select encodings effectively using a standard set of features for constraint problems; however we obtain better performance with a new set of features specifically designed for the pseudo-Boolean and linear constraints. In fact, we achieve good results when selecting encodings for unseen problem classes. Our results compare favourably to AutoFolio when using the same feature set. We discuss the relative importance of instance features to the task of selecting the best encodings, and compare several variations of the machine learning method.

show abstract

Effective Encodings of Constraint Programming Models to SMT

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

Savile Row Manual

Savile Row Manual

SMT solving for the validation of B and Event-B models

Learning to select SAT encodings for pseudo-Boolean and linear integer constraints

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About