Assignment 4 (June 23)

Opened: Wednesday, 8 June 2022, 9:11 PM
Due: Thursday, 23 June 2022, 11:59 PM
Parallel failed literal preprocessor for SAT formulas in DIMACS format
The zip file below has the following README and EXERCISE file.

README
This program takes a CNF in DIMACS format and simplifies it with failed
literal probing until completion.  This is an old well-known technique
from look-ahead solvers and works as follows.

Consider this formula in DIMACS format with 2 variables and 3 clauses:

  c this is a comment line
  p cnf 2 3
  1 2 0
  -1 2 0
  1 -2 0

The header 'p cnf 2 3' gives the number of variables ('2') and clauses ('3').
The rest of the file consists of zero terminated clauses.  Note literals are
encoded as integers.  As formula you could think of this CNF as follows:

  (x1 | x2) & (!x1 | x2) & (x1 | !x2)

On this formula failed literal probing works as follows:

We assume 'x2=true' then the third clause forces 'x1=true' and the remaining
clauses are satisfied.  Thus we did not learn anything yet and reset both
variable to be unassigned.  The same happens if we assume 'x1=true'.
Now assume 'x2=false'.  Then the first clause forces 'x1=true' and we
get that the second clause and thus the whole formula is 'false'.  Therefore
'x2' can not be 'false' in any solution to this formula.  It has to be 'true'.
We permanently assign 'x2' to 'true' which in turn also forces 'x1' to be
permanently set to 'true'.  Now all variables are forced to a value and the
formula is satisfiable.  Thus this is the only satisfying assignment.

The result of failed literal probing returns the forced assignment as clauses
and simplifies the remaining clauses (none in the example) accordingly.

  p cnf 2 2
  1 0
  2 0

The complete algorithm is not that complicated:

For all literals 'L' in the formula, assume 'L', i.e., set 'L' to 'true' and
then propagate it.  Propagation means to deduce all implied literals. More
specifically if there is a clause in the formula which has all but one of its
literals set to 'false', then the remaining one has to be set to 'true'.

If propagation leads to a conflict (all literals of a clause are assigned to
'false'), then the assumption that the formula can be satisfiable while 'L' is
'true' is wrong.  Then  'L' is called a 'failed literal' and we can
permanently set 'L' to 'false'.  If on the other hand propagation of the
assumption that 'L' is 'true' does not lead to a conflict then we have to
backtrack and unassign the assumption and all literals implied by it.

If a failed literal is found and set to 'false', we need to propagate this
learned fact (the unit clause which consist of the negation of 'L'). This in
turn might yield additional implied literals (and even lead to a conflict in
which case the formula is proven to be unsatisfiable).  In any case, after a
failed literal has been found, the formula becomes simpler and in principle we
need to probe all literals again.

This procedure has cubic complexity since (A) we have to repeat until no more
failed literals are found, (B) try all literals and (C) propagate each.

There is one optimization implemented in 'parfail' which avoids redundant
probing of literals (assuming and propagating a literal).  If a literal 'L'
was assigned to 'true' and propagated and that propagation did not lead to a
conflict, then this literal does not have to be assumed to be 'true' before
another failed literal is found.  This prevents one of the linear factors in
the complexity analysis above and renders the procedure quadratic.  In order
to implement this optimization we use virtual time stamps for when a literal
was propagated without conflict, measured in the number of failed literals
found so far before this propagation.

Even though the linear factor (C) is in many formulas much smaller than the
worst cases (almost all variables become assigned), there are instances where
this algorithm even with the described optimization takes too much time and
therefore it is a prefect target for parallelization.

EXERCISE

Parallelize the sequential version using Pthreads and other methods discussed
in the lecture and exercise 2.  The sequential code already gives some hints.

The actual algorithm uses only non-static data stored in a 'Worker' structure,
such as the current assignment and the trail of assigned literals for
backtracking.  There is a global result part, which contains a stack of
learned units (negated failed literals).

I would suggest to use this stack to exchange failed literals between
work threads and otherwise let the worker threads own and probe different
subsets of literals.  You have to be careful not to add learned units to the
global learned unit stack which were already found by other threads.  A
strategy could be to always import learned units before trying to push.

The formula is shared and propagation only changes the state of a worker.
After all workers do not find new failed literals anymore, they should have
all the same permanent assigned variables (a super set of the learned units).
Thus all but one can be reset.  The remaining one will be used to simplify the
formula and can then export all the 'implied' literals for printing.  Note,
that failed literal probing is a confluent preprocessing technique. Thus the
resulting simplified formula should always be the same.

With 'make test' you can run some simple examples.  The provided big
compressed example CNFs can be use for testing how your parallel solution
scales.  Here is the output I got of the given optimized sequential version.

$ ./parfail examples/bin1.cnf -
c [parfail] Parfail Failed Literal Preprocessor
c [parfail]
c [parfail] reading DIMACS file from 'examples/bin1.cnf'
c [parfail] found 'p cnf 2 3' header
c [parfail] found 0 original unit clauses
c [parfail] using 12 threads as determined by 'sysconf'
c [parfail] removed 3 clauses (0 remain 0%)
c [parfail] formula SATISFIABLE (all variables assigned)
c [parfail]
c [parfail] writing simplified formula to '<stdout>'
p cnf 2 2
1 0
2 0
c [parfail]
c [parfail] propagations 2 (0.01 millions per second)
c [parfail] decisions 1 (2.0 propagations per decisions)
c [parfail] conflicts 1 (1.0 decisions per conflict)
c [parfail] learned 1 (100% learned unit clauses per conflict)
c [parfail] implied 2 (2.0 per learned unit clause)
c [parfail]
c [parfail] process time 0.000 seconds
c [parfail] wall clock time 0.000 seconds
c [parfail] utilization 43% for 12 threads


$ ./parfail examples/slp-synthesis-aes-bottom18-sc2011.cnf.xz
c [parfail] Parfail Failed Literal Preprocessor
c [parfail]
c [parfail] reading DIMACS file from 'examples/slp-synthesis-aes-bottom18-sc2011.cnf.xz'
c [parfail] found 'p cnf 36410 121578' header
c [parfail] found 1 original unit clauses
c [parfail] using 12 threads as determined by 'sysconf'
c [parfail] removed 21789 clauses (99789 remain 82%)
c [parfail] formula not solved
c [parfail]
c [parfail] not writing simplified CNF (use '-' to write to '<stdout>')
c [parfail]
c [parfail] propagations 176059990 (11.38 millions per second)
c [parfail] decisions 1816700 (96.9 propagations per decisions)
c [parfail] conflicts 2026 (0.0 decisions per conflict)
c [parfail] learned 2026 (100% learned unit clauses per conflict)
c [parfail] implied 5096 (2.5 per learned unit clause)
c [parfail]
c [parfail] process time 15.465 seconds
c [parfail] wall clock time 15.465 seconds
c [parfail] utilization 8% for 12 threads


$ ./parfail examples/Mario-t-hard-2_c18.cnf.xz 
c [parfail] Parfail Failed Literal Preprocessor
c [parfail]
c [parfail] reading DIMACS file from 'examples/Mario-t-hard-2_c18.cnf.xz'
c [parfail] found 'p cnf 35945 1228400' header
c [parfail] found 27 original unit clauses
c [parfail] using 12 threads as determined by 'sysconf'
c [parfail] removed 832 clauses (1227568 remain 100%)
c [parfail] formula not solved
c [parfail]
c [parfail] not writing simplified CNF (use '-' to write to '<stdout>')
c [parfail]
c [parfail] propagations 14505730 (0.27 millions per second)
c [parfail] decisions 222217 (65.3 propagations per decisions)
c [parfail] conflicts 34 (0.0 decisions per conflict)
c [parfail] learned 34 (100% learned unit clauses per conflict)
c [parfail] implied 98 (2.9 per learned unit clause)
c [parfail]
c [parfail] process time 54.388 seconds
c [parfail] wall clock time 54.388 seconds
c [parfail] utilization 8% for 12 threads

$ ./parfail examples/abw-N-bcsstk07.mtx-w44.cnf.xz
c [parfail] Parfail Failed Literal Preprocessor
c [parfail]
c [parfail] reading DIMACS file from 'examples/abw-N-bcsstk07.mtx-w44.cnf.xz'
c [parfail] found 'p cnf 842520 7681710' header
c [parfail] found 313950 original unit clauses
c [parfail] using 12 threads as determined by 'sysconf'
c [parfail] removed 335146 clauses (7346564 remain 96%)
c [parfail] formula not solved
c [parfail]
c [parfail] not writing simplified CNF (use '-' to write to '<stdout>')
c [parfail]
c [parfail] propagations 2179791603 (17.21 millions per second)
c [parfail] decisions 505927 (4308.5 propagations per decision)
c [parfail] conflicts 0 (0.0 decisions per conflict)
c [parfail] learned 0 (0% learned unit clauses per conflict)
c [parfail] implied 309706 (0.0 per learned unit clause)
c [parfail]
c [parfail] process time 126.673 seconds
c [parfail] wall clock time 126.673 seconds
c [parfail] utilization 8% for 12 threads

There are many other interesting examples try from the last SAT competition.

Note that the thread part is only in the given sequential version for your
convenience.  It does not do anything yet, except that corresponding command
line options can be parsed (the number of threads can be set):

$ ./parfail -h
usage: parfail [ -h ] [ <threads> ] [ <input> [ <output> ] ]