Paper detail

A Concurrency Problem with Exponential DPLL(T) Proofs

Many satisfiability modulo theories solvers implement a variant of the DPLL(T ) framework which separates theory-specific reasoning from reasoning on the propositional abstraction of the formula. Such solvers conclude that a formula is unsatisfiable once they have learned enough theory conflicts to derive a propositional contradiction. However some problems, such as the diamonds problem, require learning exponentially many conflicts. We give a general criterion for establishing lower bounds on the number of theory conflicts in any DPLL(T ) proof for a given problem. We apply our criterion to two different state-of-the-art symbolic partial-order encodings of a simple, yet representative concurrency problem. Even though one of the encodings is asymptotically smaller than the other, we establish the same exponential lower bound proof complexity for both. Our experiments confirm this theoretical lower bound across multiple solvers and theory combinations.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.