Pseudo-Boolean proof logging has been used successfully to provide certificates of optimality from a variety of constraint- and satisifability-style solvers that combine reasoning with a backtracking or clause-learning search. Another paradigm, occurring in dynamic programming and decision diagram solving, instead reasons about partial states and possible transitions between them. We describe a framework for generating clean and efficient pseudo-Boolean proofs for these kinds of algorithm, and use it to produce certifying algorithms for knapsack, longest path, and interval scheduling. Because we use a common proof system, we can also reason about hybrid solving algorithms: we demonstrate this by providing proof logging for a dynamic programming based knapsack propagator inside a constraint programming solver.@en

People want to rely on optimization algorithms for complex decisions but verifying the optimality of the solutions can then become a valid concern, particularly for critical decisions taken by non-experts in optimization. One example is the shortest-path problem on a network, occurring in many contexts from transportation to logistics to telecommunications. While the standard shortest-path problem is both solvable in polynomial time and certifiable by duality, introducing side constraints makes solving and certifying the solutions much harder. We propose a proof system for constrained shortest-path problems, which gives a set of logical rules to derive new facts about feasible solutions. The key trait of the proposed proof system is that it specifically includes high-level graph concepts within its reasoning steps (such as connectivity or path structure), in contrast to using linear combinations of model constraints. Using our proof system, we can provide a step-by-step, human-auditable explanation showing that the path given by an external solver cannot be improved. Additionally, to maximize the advantages of this setup, we propose a proof search procedure that specifically aims to find small proofs of this form using a procedure similar to A* search. We evaluate our proof system on constrained shortest path instances generated from real-world road networks and experimentally show that we may indeed derive more interpretable proofs compared to an integer programming approach, in some cases leading to much smaller proofs.

@en

Proof logging is used to increase trust in the optimality and unsatisfiability claims of solvers. However, to this date, no constraint programming solver can practically produce proofs without significantly impacting performance, which hinders mainstream adoption. We address this issue by introducing a novel proof generation framework, together with a CP proof format and proof checker. Our approach is to divide the proof generation into three steps. At runtime, we require the CP solver to only produce a proof sketch, which we call a scaffold. After the solving is done, our proof processor trims and expands the scaffold into a full CP proof, which is subsequently verified. Our framework is agnostic to the solver and the verification approach. Through MiniZinc benchmarks, we demonstrate that with our framework, the overhead of logging during solving is often less than 10%, significantly lower than other approaches, and that our proof processing step can reduce the overall size of the proof by orders of magnitude and by extension the proof checking time. Our results demonstrate that proof logging has the potential to become an integral part of the CP community.@en