While static symmetry breaking has been explored in the SAT community for decades, only as of 2010 research has focused on exploiting the same discovered symmetry dynamically, during the run of the SAT solver, by learning extra clauses. The two methods are distinct and not compatible. The former prunes solutions, whereas the latter does not -- it only prunes areas of the search that do not have solutions, like standard conflict clauses. Both approaches, however, require what we call \emph{full symmetry}, namely a propositionally-consistent mapping $\sigma$ between the literals, such that $\sigma(\varphi) \equiv \varphi$, where here $\equiv$ means syntactic equivalence modulo clause ordering and literal ordering within the clauses. In this article we show that such full symmetry is not a necessary condition for adding extra clauses: isomorphism between possibly-overlapping subgraphs of the colored incidence graph is sufficient. While finding such subgraphs is a computationally hard problem, there are many cases in which they can be detected a priory by analyzing the high-level structure of the problem from which the CNF was derived. We demonstrate this principle with several well-known problems, including Van der Waerden numbers, bounded model checking and Boolean Pythagorean triples.
翻译:虽然在SAT社区数十年来一直在探索静态的对称断裂现象,但直到2010年的研究才侧重于通过在SAT求解者运行期间以动态的方式,通过学习额外条款,对所发现的相同对称进行动态利用,这两种方法是截然不同的,不兼容的。前普鲁内斯解决方案,而后者则不是 -- 它只是淡化搜索中没有解决方案的区域,如标准冲突条款。但是,这两种方法都需要我们称之为“emph{完全对称 ”的附加条款。但这两种方法都需要我们称之为“mumph{full对称 ”, 也就是在字面间以相对一致的方式绘制$\sigma(\ varphi)\ equiv\ equipif$, 此处$\ equiv$ 两种方法是截然不同的。 前普鲁特条款的排序和字面排列。 在本文中,这种完全的对称完全对称的对称并非必要条件添加额外条款: 彩色事件图表的子图之间可能是反常态的对称, 已经足够了。在寻找这样的子剖面图时,,, 也就是从一个计算了“ ” 和“ 深层次” 结构”, 我们从这个直观中测中测了“ 有很多问题。