Symbolic optimization with SMT solvers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise in efficiency of Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solvers has created numerous uses for them in software verification, program synthesis, functional programming, refinement types, etc. In all of these applications, SMT solvers are used for generating satisfying assignments (e.g., a witness for a bug) or proving unsatisfiability/validity(e.g., proving that a subtyping relation holds). We are often interested in finding not just an arbitrary satisfying assignment, but one that optimizes (minimizes/maximizes) certain criteria. For example, we might be interested in detecting program executions that maximize energy usage (performance bugs), or synthesizing short programs that do not make expensive API calls. Unfortunately, none of the available SMT solvers offer such optimization capabilities. In this paper, we present SYMBA, an efficient SMT-based optimization algorithm for objective functions in the theory of linear real arithmetic (LRA). Given a formula φ and an objective function t , SYMBA finds a satisfying assignment of φthat maximizes the value of t . SYMBA utilizes efficient SMT solvers as black boxes. As a result, it is easy to implement and it directly benefits from future advances in SMT solvers. Moreover, SYMBA can optimize a set of objective functions, reusing information between them to speed up the analysis. We have implemented SYMBA and evaluated it on a large number of optimization benchmarks drawn from program analysis tasks. Our results indicate the power and efficiency of SYMBA in comparison with competing approaches, and highlight the importance of its multi-objective-function feature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".