Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
sav08:advanced_sat_solving_techniques [2008/03/12 21:34] vkuncak |
sav08:advanced_sat_solving_techniques [2008/03/12 21:40] vkuncak |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
| analyze_conflict() { | analyze_conflict() { | ||
| cl = find_conflicting_clause(); | cl = find_conflicting_clause(); | ||
| - | while (!stop_criterion_met(c1)) { | + | while (!is_asserting_clause(c1)) { |
| var = var_of_lit(choose_literal(c1)); | var = var_of_lit(choose_literal(c1)); | ||
| c1 = resolve(c1, antecedant(var), var); | c1 = resolve(c1, antecedant(var), var); | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| * deduction rule was that some original clause C became unit clause because all literals exept literal containing var were false | * deduction rule was that some original clause C became unit clause because all literals exept literal containing var were false | ||
| * then antecedant(var) is C | * then antecedant(var) is C | ||
| + | |||
| + | asserting clause: | ||
| + | * false at current decision level | ||
| + | * only one literal has current decision level (others were assigned before) | ||
| + | |||
| + | If c1 is not asserting clause yet, we resolve it with antecedants of variables, following backwards deduction steps. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The clause forces a different value of a decision variable at a previous level. | ||
| ===== Storing Clauses ===== | ===== Storing Clauses ===== | ||