BreakID
now also for ASP
Jo Devriendt, Bart Bogaerts,
Maurice Bruynooghe, Marc Denecker
University of Leuven / Aalto University
Stateoftheart static symmetry breaking for SAT ported to ASP
Outline
 Static symmetry breaking in ASP
 Our contribution:
 Extending rule type support
 More stable graph coloring encoding
 Leveraging BreakID's improved symmetry breaking
 Experimental results
 Conclusion & Future work
Symmetry in ASP
 Defined for ground pogram with answer sets
 Permutation of literals is a symmetry if
 typically also
 Slows down search (exponentially)
 Often handled by posting
lexleader symmetry breaking
formulas
Static symmetry breaking in ASP
ASP program in standard form (LparseSmodels)
Ground ASP program
Ground ASP program + symmetry breakers
Ground ASP program as a colored graph
Grounding
"Graphing"
Automorphism detection + symmetry breaking formula construction
"Graphing"
Graph encoding of standard rule :
Graph encoding of literal :
"Graphing"
Graph encoding of integer :
Graph encoding of weight rule :
"Graphing"
 BreakID also supports
 Choice rule
 Minimize rule
 == LparseSmodels + Disjunctive rules
 (6 + #weights) colors
 (#heads + #bodies + #weights + #literals) nodes
 O( ) edges
Difference with SBASS (alternative ASP symmetry breaker)
 support for Minimize and Weight rule
 undirected edges
"Graphing"
 SBASS detects no symmetry?
 BreakID detects interchangeability of {p,q}
Hypothesis: Saucy only supports undirected edges
Symmetry breaking formulae
of BreakID
Motivating example for BreakID: pigeonhole problem
Only 2 more instances solved?
Let's try Shatter on the pigeonhole problem...
Only 2 more instances solved?
 Problem lies with generator symmetries Σ
 <Σ> is not completely broken by conjunction of sbf(σ), σ∈Σ
 For pigeonhole, there does exist some small Σ' for which sbf(σ), σ∈Σ' breaks <Σ> completely
In general, Σ lacks information on structure of group <Σ>
Symmetry breaking formula
BreakID tries to exploit symmetry group structure
 Detect row interchangeability symmetry subgroups
 Symmetry breaking based on stabilizer chain of symmetry group
 Small performance optimizations
Symmetry breaking formulae

Row interchangeability: common form of symmetry
 Stems from interchangeable objects
 Variables can be ordered as rows in matrix
 All permutations of rows are symmetries
 Can be broken completely by constructing symmetry breaking formula only for consecutive row swaps
 Assuming appropriate variable ordering
Symmetry breaking formulae
Detecting row interchangeability
Occupies(p1,h1)  Occupies(p1,h2)  Occupies(p1,h3) 
Occupies(p2,h1)  Occupies(p2,h2)  Occupies(p2,h3) 
Occupies(p3,h1)  Occupies(p3,h2)  Occupies(p3,h3) 
Occupies(p4,h1)  Occupies(p4,h2)  Occupies(p4,h3) 
Variable rows for 4 pigeons, 3 holes:
Symmetry due to interchangeable pigeons completely broken by
sbf(swap(p_{1},p_{2})) ∧ sbf(swap(p_{2},p_{3})) ∧ sbf(swap(p_{3},p_{4}))
Detecting row interchangeability
 Input: CNF theory T, Σ detected by Saucy
 Output: variable matrix M such that rows are interchangeable and <M>⊆<Σ>
 extract σ_{1}, σ_{2} ∈Σ that form 2 subsequent row swaps
 forms initial 3rowed variable matrix M
 apply every σ∈Σ to all detected rows r∈M so far
 images σ(r) disjoint of M are candidates to extend M
 test if swap r ↔ σ(r) is a symmetry by syntactical check on T
 if success, extend M with σ(r)
 use Saucy to extend Σ with new symmetry generators by fixing all variable nodes with variable in M, first row excepted
Let's try BreakID on the pigeonhole problem,
while detecting row interchangeability
 Detects full pigeon subsymmetry and hole subsymmetry
 Poly performance
 100+ holes are no problem
Symmetry breaking formulae
 If symmetry stabilizes literal , then
is a valid lexleader symmetry breaking formula for symmetry group  BreakID maximizes the number of binary symmetry breaking clauses
 by adjusting variable order
Symmetry breaking formulae
BreakID derives binary symmetry breaking clauses
based on chains of stabilizer subgroups
Stabilizer chain symmetry breaking
 Recall sbf(σ):
 for i=0:

Binary symmetry breaking clause
 x is stabilized by <Σ> iff σ(x)=x for all σ∈<Σ>

x' ∈ orbit(x) under <Σ> iff there exists σ∈<Σ> s.t. σ(x)=x'
 Given symmetry group <Σ> with smallest nonstabilized variable x, with x' ∈ orbit(x) under <Σ>,
is logical consequence of sbf(σ) for all σ∈<Σ>
 Moreover, all binary clauses in sbf(σ) for all σ∈<Σ> are derived this way [4]
Stabilizer chain symmetry breaking
 <Σ> has subgroups that have other smallest nonstabilized variables, depending on variable order
 Create stabilizer chain of <Σ> along variable ordering:
 next subgroup G_{i} is the stabilizer subgroup stabilizing the next nonstabilized variable in ordering
 G_{i} have different smallest nonstabilized variables x
 for each i: Orbit(x) under G_{i} leads to binary symmetry breaking clauses
 Derives all binary symmetry breaking clauses of <Σ> under variable ordering
Stabilizer chain symmetry breaking
Occupies(p1,h1)  Occupies(p1,h2)  Occupies(p1,h3) 
Occupies(p2,h1)  Occupies(p2,h2)  Occupies(p2,h3) 
Occupies(p3,h1)  Occupies(p3,h2)  Occupies(p3,h3) 
Occupies(p4,h1)  Occupies(p4,h2)  Occupies(p4,h3) 
Occupies(p_{1} ,h_{1}) < Occupies(p_{2 },h_{1}) < Occupies(p_{3 },h_{1}) < Occupies(p_{4} ,h_{1}) < ...
Stabilizer chain for pigeon symmetry consists of 4 subgroups
G_{0} permutes rows 1234,
G_{1} permutes rows 234,
G_{2} swaps rows 34,
G_{3}=1
Binary symmetry breaking clauses:
¬Occupies(p_{1 },h_{1}) v Occupies(p_{2} ,h_{1})
...
¬Occupies(p_{3 },h_{1}) v Occupies(p_{4 },h_{1})
 More compact conversion of sbf to CNF [5]
 3 clauses of size 3 instead of
4 clauses of sizes 34
 3 clauses of size 3 instead of
 Limit the size of symmetry breaking formula to 50
 Limit symmetry detection time of Saucy
Symmetry breaking formulae
BreakID's small optimizations compared to Shatter / Sbass
Symmetry breaking in SAT competitions?
 BreakID overhead is low enough to be competitive, even on asymmetric instances
 Participated succesfully in SAT13, SAT15 competitions
 Experimental results on SAT14 instances
(Glucose as base solver)
Summary
 BreakID follows in Shatter's footsteps (after ~10 years!)
 Derive group structure information
 Row interchangeability detection
 Stabilizer chain based symmetry breaking
 Both are approximative algorithms
 Efficiency optimizations ensure competitiveness
Experimental comparison
of BreakID and SBASS
1000s timeout
Experimental comparison
of BreakID and SBASS
50 000s timeout
Conclusion
 BreakID also works in an ASP setting
 Supports two extra rule types
 More robust due to undirected edges
 More efficient due to smarter symmetry breaking formulas
Future work?
 Symmetry detection on predicate level
 Paper presentation next friday ;)

Dynamic symmetry breaking
 Work underway, ready by SAT17 :)
Future of symmetry handling
ASP program in standard form (LparseSmodels)
Ground ASP program
Ground ASP program + symmetry breakers
Ground ASP program as a colored graph
Grounding
"Graphing"
Automorphism detection + symmetry breaking formula construction
Predicate level symmetry detection
Symmetry handling during search
Experimental comparison
of IDP and SBASS
1000s timeout
Thanks for your attention!
Questions?
[0] Improved Static Symmetry Breaking for SAT  2016  Devriendt et al.
[1] Symmetry and Satisfiability: An Update  2010  Katebi et al.
[2] Efficient SymmetryBreaking for Boolean Satisfiability  2006  Aloul et al.
[3] On the importance of row symmetry  2014  Devriendt et al.
[4] Automatic generation of constraints for partial symmetry breaking  2011  Jefferson & Petrie
[5] Symmetry and satisfiability  2009  Sakallah
[6] On Local Domain Symmetry for Model Expansion  2016  Devriendt et al. (presentation Friday)
[7] Symmetrybreaking Answer Set Solving  2011  Drescher et al.
Copy of BreakIDASP
By krr
Copy of BreakIDASP
SAT16
 1,545