-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
Fully Evaluate Nested Arrays for Model Generation in CVC5 #539
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
baierd
wants to merge
16
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
fix_cvc5_array_model
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+573
−184
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…as not every solver can do that!) for int and bv arrays
…nor modifications from 0d463c8
…, but throw them until a common method. This simplifies some nesting in the code.
We should avoid extensive recursion if possible.
…visitor usage. This solution removes the ability to list UF assignments for bound variables as part of the model. However, the model API is even documented in such a way that such values could be missing, and the user should directly evaluate formulas in the model.
kfriedberger
previously approved these changes
Nov 14, 2025
Member
kfriedberger
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok for me
It seems as if Z3 produces n^2 additional variables in the model, if arrays are represented. Let's reduce this number and only list the relevant variables.
…g arrays and UFs) towards CVC4. This change replaces the recursive implementation with faster and simpler visitor usage. Additionally, we get proper array-handling in the CVC4 model. This solution removes the ability to list UF assignments for bound variables as part of the model. However, the model API is even documented in such a way that such values could be missing, and the user should directly evaluate formulas in the model.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This MR adds CVC5 multi-dimensional array model evaluation based on @daniel-raffler s implementation in commit 0d463c83410a332ed81ff4f7628d25ae729b3782, with minor modifications.
It also adds 2 tests for multi-dimensional arrays not based on SMTLIB2 parsing (we did not have any) as well.