Satisfiability

The Antibandwidth and Cyclic Antibandwidth problems are NP-hard graph labeling problems that aim to maximize the minimum (cyclic) distance between labels assigned to adjacent vertices. Extensive research on these problems has resulted in a variety of mathematical formulations and computational approaches. However, their minimum span perspective, in which a prescribed minimum (cyclic) distance is fixed and the objective is to minimize the label span, has received comparatively little attention. In this paper, we consider this complementary perspective by introducing the Minimum Span Antibandwidth/Cyclic Antibandwidth Labeling (MSABL/MSCABL) problems and developing a unified Boolean Satisfiability (SAT)-based framework for solving them. The SAT-based framework formulates MSABL/MSCABL as a sequence of decision problems and exploits their monotonicity to accelerate the search process. We also consider two SAT solving strategies, parallel and incremental SAT solving: the former examines multiple candidate spans concurrently, while the latter reuses a single SAT instance while progressively restricting the label domain. The proposed approaches are evaluated on benchmark instances from the Harwell-Boeing Sparse Matrix Collection and compared with CPLEXCP, CPLEXMIP, and Gurobi. The results show that SAT-based approaches are highly competitive in solution quality, with the parallel approach performing best overall for MSCABL and the incremental approach for MSABL. With the no-hole constraint, they remain competitive with CPLEXCP and significantly outperform CPLEXMIP and Gurobi, particularly for MSCABL. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of SAT solving as an exact approach for MSABL and MSCABL.

Quantifier instantiation is currently the main approach to non-ground SMT solving: solvers generate ground instances and solve the resulting ground SMT problems with CDCL(T)-style reasoning. When a conflict is found, conflict analysis learns only a ground clause, even though the conflict comes from instances of non-ground clauses. Yet non-ground reasoning can give exponentially shorter proofs than purely ground reasoning. We propose a calculus that consists of ground instantiations, CDCL(T)-style rules, and non-ground conflict analysis. The solver reasons on ground instances, but the resolution steps of conflict analysis are performed on their original non-ground clauses. This produces learned clauses that are typically more general than the ground conflict. With a suitable strategy, the learned clauses are even non-redundant. We also show how chronological backtracking can be included in SMT solving. Our calculus gives a common setting for CDCL(T)-style SMT solving, a range of instantiation-based procedures, and non-ground clause learning, and we prove that it simulates CDCL, SCL(FOL), SCL(T), and even Resolution.

While HTN planning has received significant attention in recent years, support for numerical reasoning remains very limited. In this paper, we investigate numerical Totally-Ordered HTN (TOHTN) planning and show how standard SAT-based encodings can be naturally extended with SMT to handle numeric fluents. In addition, we introduce a benchmark suite for numerical TOHTN planning, providing a first common basis for evaluation in this setting. Experimental results show that this simple encoding already constitutes a competitive baseline. This work opens the way to more expressive approaches to HTN planning.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable promise in translating and reformulating complex mathematical optimization problems across modeling languages. However, validating such transformations through empirical solver executions alone is unreliable, as solver outcomes may be affected by local minima, structural timeouts, numerical artifacts, and subtle semantic divergence between formulations. We introduce SOVER, an LLM-assisted SMT framework that separates semantic mapping from formal certification: Z3 checks domain cross-feasibility and global objective-order preservation for mixed-integer linear formulations, while dReal provides tolerance-aware feasibility/range and $ε$-argmin checks for continuous nonlinear formulations. We also introduce NLEquiv-150, a public benchmark of 100 equivalent and 50 deliberately hard non-equivalent nonlinear reformulation pairs. With LLM-extracted mappings, SOVER classifies 149/150 pairs (99.33%) correctly, including all 50 hard negatives; the sole error is an incomplete mapping extraction.

Healthcare workforce scheduling is an NP-hard optimization problem requiring simultaneous satisfaction of labor regulations, coverage requirements, employee preferences and cost objectives. Existing approaches (genetic algorithms, integer programming, constraint programming) model 6-12 constraints at shift-level granularity and cannot guarantee regulatory compliance. They also lack support for multi-role, multi-skill heterogeneity, mandatory break scheduling with midpoint control, acuity-weighted workload equity, sub-shift granularity, inter-week stability, and cross-midnight shifts. This paper presents CP-SAT: a Constraint Programming formulation for multi-role, multi-skill healthcare scheduling. CP-SAT enforces 14 hard constraints guaranteeing zero regulatory violations, while optimizing 15 soft objectives via a unified weighted penalty function. Contributions include a shift-window decomposition enabling break scheduling with centrality control, acuity-weighted workload equity, multi-granularity resolution from 15 minutes to 1 day, inter-week stability, and grid-offset preprocessing mapping cross-midnight shifts into a single scheduling day without solver changes. CP-SAT is evaluated on 18 instances: five synthetic hospital units (10-33 nurses), 10 INRC-II benchmarks (5-80 nurses, up to 8-week horizons) and 3 NRP-23 compatible instances (10-25 nurses) with cross-midnight Night shifts. Results: zero hard-constraint violations across all 18 instances by construction; proven optimality on INRC-II n005w4 (objective 118, gap 0.0%, 104s); feasible schedules scaling to 179,800 variables and 351,425 constraints (80 nurses); service quality improved 50-67% over MOGA; and model size scaling near-linearly at approximately 4,400 variables per employee. The formulation enforces 29 total constraints (14 hard, 15 soft), nearly three times the industry average.

A common problem in social choice is to determine whether there is a social choice procedure, such as a voting method, satisfying some desired criteria. Computer-aided methods such as SAT solving can sometimes answer these questions. However, under typical encodings, a SAT solver may only synthesize a voting method on a finite domain, while we may want one on an infinite domain, such as the domain of all preference profiles for a fixed number of candidates but any finite number of voters. In this paper, we use an approach based on reasoning with constrained Horn clauses and computation with polyhedra to synthesize a voting method on an infinite domain. We then use SMT and Lean to verify its properties. Our main result is a possibility theorem about four well-known criteria from voting theory: the Condorcet winner and loser criteria, positive involvement, and resolvability. Previous work has shown that for five or more candidates, there is no voting method satisfying these axioms, and that for four candidates, there is no method satisfying these core axioms plus one more invariance axiom. Here we show that for four candidates, there does exist a method satisfying the core axioms and more.

There are several methods for searching for graphs with prescribed properties, such as SAT solvers and specialized generators. These methods return the result as raw data: an adjacency matrix or a string encoding. The raw data certifies that the graph exists, but it does not reveal any structural properties of the graph. We ask whether one can automatically discover a short algebraic description if only this raw data is provided. We look for a description such as a Cayley graph $\mathrm{Cay}(Γ, S)$ or a lexicographic product $C_5[K_3]$. We address this question with a neurosymbolic approach. We propose an agent that runs on a general-purpose large language model with no fine-tuning or per-target training. The model interleaves reasoning with calls to the computer algebra system SageMath: it analyzes the target graph, proposes and tests candidate constructions, and revises them until the output matches the target. The agent communicates with SageMath through a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server, which we release as a general-purpose bridge. Whether a construction matches the target is checked by a single exact isomorphism test, and therefore rests on the symbolic side and not on the model. We test the approach on a benchmark of 100 highly symmetric graphs, namely two-orbit graphs on up to 25 vertices; the benchmark was fixed in advance. Our agent could find verified algebraic constructions for all of them, without falling back to raw encodings. A strong template-enumeration baseline reaches only about $20\%$, and a catalog lookup could not identify any of these graphs. However, construction quality declines when symmetry is removed. As a concrete application, we identify the smallest known counterexample to the Bernhart-Kainen dispersability conjecture, a $16$-vertex graph that enumeration found as raw data. For this graph, our agent found an explicit algebraic construction.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning improves large language model (LLM) performance while also providing an observable interface to the model's reasoning process. Existing approaches that leverage verbalized CoTs to monitor reasoning correctness, however, largely evaluate the semantic correctness or consistency of individual intermediate steps, rather than how the reasoning process evolves across the trace. As a result, failures distributed across the reasoning trajectory, rather than those localized to a single incorrect step, remain comparatively underexplored. Furthermore, verbalized CoTs need not faithfully reflect the model's internal reasoning, motivating analyses that do not treat individual statements as literal accounts of internal computation. In this work, we therefore ask whether the dynamics of visible CoT can be leveraged to systematically distinguish successful from failed reasoning without assuming such semantic faithfulness. We study a range of LLMs on verifiable Boolean satisfiability tasks with variable complexity, enabling controlled comparisons near each model's capability frontier. Tagging CoT sentences by reasoning function reveals premature verification collapse on SAT problems: incorrect traces enter clause checking earlier, repeat similar operations, and finalize sooner. On UNSAT problems, models presumptuously move towards incorrect SAT conclusions, checking candidate assignments rather than deriving contradictions across constructed cases. Subsequently, a targeted proof-search prompt intervention raises Llama3-70B accuracy from 13.3% to 85%, correcting 84.6% of these errors. These results show that capability failures can manifest as distributed, task-dependent changes in the structure of visible reasoning, and that CoT dynamics agnostic to whether the verbalized trace reflects the model's internal computations can help diagnose and correct failures.

Constraint programming is a core technology for solving complex combinatorial problems in scheduling, planning, configuration, and verification. Trusting its results therefore demands guarantees at two levels: that reformulations applied beforehand are semantics-preserving, and that solvers produce correct answers. In this work, we introduce a framework that addresses both verification levels in the Lean theorem prover: it can be used to prove formulation-level properties, such as equivalence, equisatisfiability, and the correctness of symmetry-breaking constraints, parametrically for entire problem families; and to check solver-produced certificates for individual instances via translation backends to external formats such as MiniZinc, SMT-LIB, and OPB. Combining both levels yields an end-to-end workflow that establishes the satisfiability or unsatisfiability of a constraint problem without trusting the external solver. Experimental results show that our framework's verified symmetry breaking also pays off in practice: a single parametric proof per problem family, reused across all instance sizes, reduces solver search effort by a factor of up to 2x10^7, while the entire in-Lean certification stays affordable, taking at most a few minutes for our largest instances.

The Simple Temporal Problem (STP) is a core framework for quantitative temporal constraints. As STP data can be inconsistent, we study MAXSTP: compute a maximum-cardinality consistent subset of constraints. This extension is NP-hard, and we analyze its parameterized complexity under measures that capture practically relevant instance features: the number of variables $n$ (instance scale), the maximum coefficient magnitude $k$ (numeric range), and structural parameters of the constraint graph such as treewidth $tw$ (decomposability) and vertex cover size $vc$ (density). We show that MAXSTP is W[1]-hard parameterized by $n$, implying that $n$ and parameters that depend on $n$ (including $tw$ and $vc$) are insufficient for fixed-parameter tractability. For combined parameters, we give an $O^*(k^n)$-time algorithm, yielding single-exponential solvability for fixed $k$. While $k+tw$ remains W[1]-hard, MAXSTP is in XP via an $O^*((n\cdot k)^{tw})$ algorithm. Our results suggest that MAXSTP is often computationally harder than optimizing qualitative CSPs. We verify that many such problems (including RCC-8 and Allen's algebra) are FPT when parameterized by $n$ or $tw$. However, we also demonstrate that FPT algorithms for MAXSTP are indeed possible but with other parameters such as $k + vc$.

The Single Constant Multiplication problem is a fundamental NP-hard optimization task in hardware design, which seeks to decompose a fixed constant using only additions, subtractions, and bit-shifts. Although dynamic programming methods can produce near-optimal SAT encodings for SCM, their encoding cost remains high for large constants. We propose a neuro-symbolic framework that accelerates SCM SAT encoding by identifying good rules for guiding operator selection during decomposition. Our approach employs a graph neural network model to predict promising operator types from constant decompositions, and exploits the resulting confidence scores to prune no-good choices in the symbolic search. Experimental results on unseen 17-32 bit constants demonstrate one to two orders of magnitude reductions in encoding time, over 97% reduction in memory usage, and an order-of-magnitude decrease in branching, while preserving near-optimal encoding quality in terms of additions. These results show that learning-guided symbolic strategies can significantly improve the scalability and efficiency of SCM encoding. Our code and data are publicly available at: https://github.com/Chufeng-Jiang/SCM_MLDP

Packing for air travel is recurring and error-prone: the checklist must be personal and context-aware, yet feasible under safety rules, item dependencies, and luggage limits. Existing packing assistants are template-driven and generic, or recommendation-driven but unconstrained, leaving users to manually patch regulatory and capacity violations. We propose a reasoning-guided learning framework with three stages: (1) a symbolic engine that generates a regulation-aware seed checklist with explicit dependency structure, (2) a two-stage preference learner that estimates inclusion and priority utilities from user add and remove actions while mitigating survivorship bias, and (3) a CP-SAT optimizer that selects a compact, compliant subset. The architecture instantiates a general pattern for constrained personalization, applicable wherever hard feasibility coexists with sparse preference signals. On 604 labeled trip scenarios, comprising 29K inclusion labels and 343K pairwise comparisons, the symbolic engine attains 99.7% recall and 0.96 rubric validity, compared with 0.78 to 0.81 for frontier LLMs. Gradient-boosted trees and LambdaMART reach an AUC-ROC of 0.943 and an NDCG@5 of 0.923. CP-SAT attains 100% constraint satisfaction, compared with 28% for greedy selection and 10% for random selection. Deployment in FlyEnJoy, a production iOS travel app, doubled checklist completions and reduced editing and completion time.

We report on CoreForge, an experience in using large language models (LLMs) to build an unweighted MaxSAT solver from research papers rather than from an existing solver codebase. The project focuses on unsatisfiability-based MaxSAT algorithms and follows an iterative workflow that combines paper discussions with ChatGPT, implementation through Codex prompts, and repeated LLM-assisted code audits and revisions. Although the codebase implements several algorithms and solver components, our evaluation focuses on configurations that combine core-guided optimization, lightweight preprocessing, core minimization, integration with integer linear optimization backends, and a new core-sequence lookahead approach. Our experience suggests that LLMs can support solver implementation from papers, while requiring external validation, benchmarking, and human guidance. In our experiments, fuzzing and MaxSAT Evaluation instances did not reveal wrong answers in the tested configurations, although performance remains below the best hand-engineered MaxSAT solvers. We summarize what worked, what remained difficult, and the lessons for future LLM-assisted solver development.

Vision--Language Models (VLMs) have recently demonstrated promising performance on structured visual reasoning tasks, including grid-based puzzles. However, despite strong perceptual capabilities, these models lack explicit mechanisms for enforcing logical consistency and frequently generate assignments that violate underlying constraints. In this paper, we propose a neuro-symbolic approach that integrates formal constraint reasoning into the VLM solving process via a Maximum Satisfiability (MaxSAT) oracle. Rather than computing solutions directly, the symbolic component acts as a consistency validator and refinement engine. Candidate placements generated by the VLM are encoded as soft clauses in a partial MaxSAT formulation, while Sudoku constraints remain hard clauses. When inconsistencies arise, the MaxSAT solver identifies a largest mutually consistent subset of assignments, which is then translated into structured textual and visual feedback to guide subsequent refinements. We evaluate our approach on a Sudoku dataset across multiple open-source and closed-access VLMs. Results show that MaxSAT-based feedback improves logical consistency and increases the number of solved instances, particularly in full-board refinement mode. These findings demonstrate that symbolic optimisation can enhance the reliability of vision-language reasoning.

We present a pipeline for constructing maze structures from input patterns such as text or shapes. The central path-synthesis problem is encoded in Satisfiability Modulo Theories as global constraints on adjacency, continuity, and pattern-constrained coverage, allowing each fixed-bound instance to be solved in one call. The resulting path is either a planar, self-avoiding route or a layered traversal with prescribed over--under crossings, and it serves as a scaffold for constructing planar mazes and three-dimensional realizations of woven mazes. This report extends the published Bridges 2026 conference paper with more representative SMT-LIB examples and a fuller account of how synthesized paths become concrete maze constructions in planar and three-dimensional form.

Workforce scheduling is an NP-hard combinatorial optimization problem requiring simultaneous satisfaction of labor regulations, coverage requirements, employee preferences and operational objectives. Existing CP formulations typically model simplified instances with 6-12 constraints at shift-level granularity and critically lack explicit support for: mandatory break scheduling with midpoint placement control; acuity weighted workload equity; sub-shift temporal granularity enabling demand-driven staffing; inter-week schedule stability; and cross-midnight shift patterns common in 24-hour operations. This paper presents CP-WSP: a declarative CP-SAT framework enforcing 14 hard constraints as mathematically inviolable requirements (zero regulatory violations by construction) while optimizing 15 soft objectives through a unified weighted penalty function -- all configurable via a JSON specification with no code changes required. Key contributions include: a shift-window variable decomposition enabling mandatory break scheduling with centrality control; acuity-weighted workload equity; multi-granularity temporal resolution from 30 minutes to 2 hours; inter-week schedule stability; a grid-offset preprocessing technique for cross-midnight shifts; and a reproducible 36-configuration benchmark suite for community comparison. Evaluated on INRC-II benchmarks at both hourly and shift-level granularity and on 36 synthetic configurations.

Satisfiability modulo theory (SMT) solvers have significantly advanced automated reasoning due to their effectiveness in solving problems across various fields. With the advancement in SMT solvers, there is growing interest in exploring capabilities beyond mere satisfiability, similar to the progression observed in Boolean satisfiability solvers that expanded into counting and sampling. In this study, we investigate the following question: Can we rely on modern CNF model counters and CNF samplers to extend modern SMT solvers to handle the problems of counting and sampling over bit-vectors? The main contribution of this work is the development of an efficient and user-friendly tool, csb, that solves a bunch of problems around model counting and sampling on the theory of bit-vectors, namely exact and approximate projected and non-projected model counting, along with the almost-uniform and uniform-like sampling. In the case of exact counting, projected counting, and uniform sampling. Our tool csb converts the bit-vector formula into a CNF formula using bit-blasting techniques before applying CNF model counters or samplers to perform counting or sampling. Our experiments demonstrate significant performance improvements over existing methods.

SAT solvers settle combinatorial problems beyond the reach of interactive theorem provers and produce LRAT certificates for independent verification. We present LRAT-Catcher, a standalone, general-purpose tool that imports a DIMACS formula together with an LRAT certificate into Lean 4 as a theorem. LRAT-Catcher runs the formally verified LRAT checker from Lean core as compiled native code via reflection. This scales to instances where Mathlib's explicit proof-term import exhausts memory. LRAT-Catcher also composes cube-and-conquer solving runs entirely inside Lean. Per-cube refutations are combined with a cover-completeness certificate, itself an LRAT proof, into a single unsatisfiability theorem. Verified encodings connect CNF-level results to the original combinatorial problems. We evaluate the tool against Mathlib's proof-term import and the external checker cake_lpr on establishing the Schur number S(4) = 44 and the Ramsey number R(4,4) = 18 as Lean theorems.

We investigate two approaches for extending CEGAR-tableaux with SAT-shortcuts using a previously known approach called RECAR but also a totally new approach using the modal resolution theorem prover KSP as an oracle. Our experiments using our C++ implementation CEGARBox++ of CEGAR-tableaux show that: (1) CEGARBox++ with RECAR SAT-shortcuts is not competitive (2) CEGARBox++ using KSP to provide SAT-shortcuts is superior to both CEGARBox++ and KSP, particularly on large satisfiable problems. As far as we know, this is the first effective integration of SAT, tableaux and resolution methods for modal satisfiability which performs better than its parts.

Formal tools such as SAT and SMT solvers are increasingly embedded in language model reasoning pipelines when a safety or security critical question can be formulated in logic. Unlike chain of thought whose steps are sampled from the model distribution without formal guarantee, a solver produces a sound and independently verifiable answer. However, the soundness guarantee can be lost in the interaction between the solver and the model. The hybrid pipeline has three components: formalizing the question, deciding it, and narrating the result. Prior work has studied the formalization and decision, but not narration, which is the step that turns a formal tool's output into the user answer. To fill the narration gap, we first model the LLM-solver loop as a verified decision procedure. We further evaluate five open-sourced models under prompt injection, and we find certificate gating makes the solver verdict sound, while an adversary can invert a verified conclusion across phrasings and channels. We study the mitigation through hardened prompt that reduces injection significantly but cannot eliminate it and still suffers under adaptive attack. Combining the formal analysis and empirical studies, we show in the LLM-solver loop, robustness does not reach to the answer that the user finally reads.

This paper investigates the computational complexity of verification problems for Binarized Neural Networks (BNNs), in which activations and weights are binary. Specifically, we study three verification problems. First, we prove that checking the satisfiability of a linear property for a BNN is NP-complete via a reduction from the Boolean Satisfiability (SAT) problem. Second, we show that verifying robustness under non-uniform image occlusion is NP-complete through a reduction from SAT. Finally, we demonstrate that uniform occlusion induces a piecewise-constant structure in the network output, which enables the design of a polynomial-time algorithm for robustness verification.

In this paper, we present a procedure for numeric planning based on Symbolic Pattern Planning (SPP). Given a numeric planning problem $Π$, a pattern $\prec$ is a sequence of actions used to define a formula encoding the subsequences of $\prec$ executable from a starting state $S$. Cardellini, Giunchiglia, and Maratea (2024a) follow the Planning as Satisfiability approach by defining, at each step $n \ge 0$, a formula $Π^\prec_n$ in which $(i)$ the pattern $\prec$ is computed only for $n=0$ in the initial state $I$ of $Π$, and then exploited at each step $n$, $(ii)$ the starting state $S$ is set to $I$, and $(iii)$ the set $G$ of goals is required to hold in the last state that can be reached by one of the subsequences of $\prec$ concatenated $n$ times. The procedure begins with $n=0$, terminates as soon as $Π^\prec_n$ is satisfiable, and otherwise proceeds by incrementing $n$. In this paper, possibly at each step, $(i)$ we symbolically search for an intermediate state $P$ reachable from $I$, closer to a goal state, $(ii)$ dynamically recompute the pattern $\prec_h$ -- to be used in the next step -- in $P$, $(iii)$ refine the pattern $\prec_g$ used to reach $P$, and $(iv)$ start the new search from the state $S$ which can be either the initial state $I$ or the last computed intermediate state $P$, exploiting the computed patterns $\prec_g$ and $\prec_h$ to define the pattern $\prec$ to be used in the search. In particular, at each step, we define a formula $Π^{\prec}_{S,P}$ encoding the existence of a state $P'$ closer than $P$ to a goal state, with $P'$ reachable from the starting state $S$ when using the pattern $\prec$. We present different techniques for producing such formulas, each corresponding to a different strategy for exploring the search space. We prove their correctness and completeness, the latter under certain conditions.

Compilation-based techniques represent an important stream of solvers for multi-agent path finding (MAPF) due to their modularity and adaptability for non-standard variants of the problem. While in the standard MAPF the task is to navigate all agents from their initial positions to given individual goal positions without any collision, variants where a different requirement for agents is used are also relevant. Such a variant is MAPF with unassigned agents (UA-MAPF) where some agents have the same setting as in the standard MAPF with initial positions and goals while the remaining agents have the initial position but have no goal - unassigned agents. Despite unassigned agent do not need to reach any goal position they have to be moved out of the way of the standard agents if needed which represent a specific challenge. We show in this paper that UA-MAPF can be expressed in recent compilation-based techniques for MAPF based on formulating the problem as Boolean satisfiability, namely we adapt SMT-CBS and NRF-SAT, the recent solvers based on counterexample guided abstraction refinement and non-refined abstractions.

We study parallel Continuous Local Search (CLS) as a solution approach for Boolean satisfiability problems with symmetric pseudo-Boolean (PB) constraints. Here, the $n$-variable PB-satisfiability problem is relaxed to a continuous optimisation problem with a differentiable objective function on an $n$-dimensional hypercube. For satisfiable instances, the global minimisers of this optimisation problem correspond to satisfying assignments of the SAT problem at hand. We present several novel findings via empirical experiments: (i) redundant constraints can inhibit rather than accelerate convergence; (ii) CLS shows promise as a sub-solver in hybridised settings, quickly completing partial assignments; and (iii) local search rapidly converges to a stable distribution of solution quality (i.e., degree of satisfaction), due to saddle-dense objectives where additional solver steps yield diminishing returns. Our findings inform practical uses of CLS for SAT on modern accelerator hardware.

We present Accelerated Fourier SAT (AFSAT), a GPU-accelerated solver for pseudo-Boolean satisfiability based on continuous local search (CLS). AFSAT realises the proof-of-concept approach, FastFourierSAT, into a fully-engineered solver supporting any heterogeneous mixture of symmetric constraint types and lengths within a single problem instance. Using the JAX compiler, AFSAT leverages pure function composition, automatic vectorisation, automatic differentiation, and just-in-time (JIT) compilation to perform massively parallel CLS across batches of candidate assignments. We demonstrate substantially improved numerical stability, runtime performance, and memory efficiency over the proof-of-concept. We achieve this by way of identifying and addressing various limitations that arise from memory latency and floating-point representation, as well as leveraging automatic parallelisation and compact representations. The inherent representational and stability limitations of floating point are partially addressed by a tailored discrete Fourier transform implementation. We achieve near-linear throughput when scaling to multiple accelerators via JAX array sharding.

LLMs can plan by either generating action sequences directly as a Planner or translating tasks into domain specific language for an external solver as a Formalizer. While most real-world tasks are asynchronous with non-uniform durations, concurrency, and execution-time constraints, existing benchmarks hardly cover them. We unify these asynchronous planning challenges under a single formulation and introduce the first three benchmarks that address each at scale. We conclude that the choice of formal representation primarily determines whether planning scales: as dependency graphs grow from 5 to 100 actions, Planner collapses from 96% to 5% plan accuracy and PDDL2.1 Formalizer from 13% to 0%, while CP-SAT Formalizer averages 94% and still achieves 83% at 100 actions. Faithfulness diagnostics show that PDDL2.1's predicate-based planning representation becomes brittle compared to general constraint satisfaction programs, when LLMs must keep predicates, effects, and goals consistent. Execution-time updates of planning constraints further degrade performance sharply (Planner 23.9%, PDDL2.1 0.7%, CP-SAT 46.1%), but a state-aware repair strategy that updates only event-induced constraints recovers CP-SAT Formalizer to 84.5%.

Factored tasks are a classical planning representation that extends SAS+ with limited forms of disjunctive preconditions, conditional effects, and angelic nondeterminism. This allows for a more compact representation of tasks than traditional formalisms such as STRIPS or SAS+, and supports a wide range of task transformations. However, existing planning approaches for factored tasks have been limited to heuristic search methods. In this work, we investigate how to encode factored tasks in SAT. We propose several ways to encode the tasks, focusing on different strategies for translating the factored transition relation into propositional logic. We also analyze how to exploit parallelism at various levels in this setting and study the impact of common task transformations on the performance of SAT-based planners.

Many learning tasks in science and engineering are characterized by sparse datasets, which limits the effectiveness of purely data-driven approaches. At the same time, these problems are often accompanied by rich domain knowledge derived from physical laws, operational requirements, and expert heuristics. Such knowledge is frequently expressed as rules involving logical propositions and linear inequalities. Existing neuro-symbolic methods typically enforce these rules approximately through soft penalties, assume input-independent rules when designing specialized architectures, or rely on non-differentiable post-processing at inference time to achieve hard constraint satisfaction. While recent advances in differentiable optimization layers enable end-to-end feasibility enforcement within neural networks, extending these approaches to logical or mixed-integer rules remains challenging due to inherent nonconvexity. In this work, we propose a unified end-to-end framework for enforcing hard, input-dependent mixed integer linear constraints within neural networks. Our approach represents rules as disjunctive constraints and applies hierarchical convex relaxations to obtain convex hull formulations. These relaxations yield tractable linear constraints that can be embedded as differentiable optimization layers while enabling exact rule satisfaction. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework on real-world datasets, achieving perfect rule satisfaction and strong predictive performance.

The Random Gradient hyper-heuristic was recently shown to be able to learn the optimal neighbourhood size when optimizing the LeadingOnes benchmark via the Randomised Local Search (RLS) meta-heuristic. However, for this to happen, a learning period of a certain length $τ$ had to be used, differently from classic hyper-heuristics, which change their behaviour based on the success of only the previous iteration. In this paper, we show how to automatically set this new parameter value, relieving the user from the non-trivial task of controlling this novel algorithm parameter. We prove that the resulting hyper-heuristic selects the optimal neighbourhood size in a $1-o(1)$ fraction of the iterations and, consequently, optimises the LeadingOnes benchmark in the best possible time (apart from lower-order terms) achievable with these neighborhood sizes.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at understanding natural language but struggle with optimisation tasks involving multiple constraints and user-defined preferences, which commonly arise in domains such as robotics. We propose a hybrid reasoning approach in which LLMs externalise reasoning through code generation. Given a natural language problem description, an LLM generates Python code that encodes user-defined constraints and preferences as a preference-based Maximum Satisfiability (MaxSAT) problem, which is then solved by an exact MaxSAT solver. To ensure correctness, solutions returned by the model-generated code are independently verified for feasibility and optimality against a canonical MaxSAT encoding, allowing for different encodings and multiple optimal solutions. We evaluate our approach using both open-source and closed-access LLMs on three families of preference-based reasoning tasks, and compare it against direct-answer, chain-of-thought, and program-of-thought baselines using the same models. While these baselines rarely produce feasible solutions, the MaxSAT-based pipeline achieves substantially higher acceptance rates, in some cases exceeding 80%. Our results demonstrate that LLM-driven code generation combined with preference-based MaxSAT enables solver-verifiable optimisation with respect to generated encodings, and substantially improves correctness under independently verified reference semantics.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for tasks that implicitly reduce to Boolean satisfiability (SAT), yet their reasoning ability on SAT remains unclear. We present a systematic study of LLMs on 2-SAT and 3-SAT, together with two canonical reductions, Vertex Cover and discrete 3D packing, to probe representation-invariant reasoning. We first evaluate models using conventional metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, and F1, as well as the SAT phase-transition setting. We find that these metrics can be misleading: many models obtain high scores by over-predicting satisfiable formulas, fail to reproduce the classical easy-hard-easy signature around the 3-SAT threshold, and degrade sharply as the number of variables grows. To address this problem, we introduce a paired-formula protocol based on minimally different satisfiable and unsatisfiable instances, together with Accurate Differentiation Rate (ADR), which requires both members of each pair to be classified correctly. ADR separates reasoning-oriented models from heuristic ones and correlates with witness validity. Beyond CNF, we test cross-representation consistency by converting CNF to Vertex Cover and 3-SAT to discrete 3D packing. Model decisions on CNF and on the corresponding graph or packing instances agree for most models on more than 80 percent of instances, suggesting stable decision rules across representations. Overall, our results show that SAT is a conservative probe for LLM reasoning, and that paired evaluation with ADR provides a more faithful and representation-robust assessment than conventional metrics.

Optimization problems such as the NP-complete 3-SAT provide an important benchmark for the difficult task of finding ground-states in strongly correlated many-body systems with rugged energy landscapes. The study of random 3-SAT problems as Ising spin Hamiltonians in statistical physics has yielded major insights including the existence of a satisfiability phase transition, and the prediction of a critical parameter line of particularly hard instances. Yet, progress on solving those instances has been scarce for several decades. Here, introducing the Target-SAT (TSAT) algorithm, we roughly triple the tractable problem sizes in the hardest regime, with an even greater improvement in a vast range of neighboring regions. By leveraging statistical information hidden in the combinatorial constraints of the problem, TSAT is actively guided in its stochastic local search toward a target within the relevant parameter space. Our analysis also explains why established local search algorithms are limited to relatively small system sizes due to a vast low-energy trap. Furthermore, we characterize the aforementioned critical line in terms of a dominant additional complexity barrier, whose exponential scaling is quickly overcome by TSAT only in the surrounding parameter space. With TSAT, the lead in solving the hardest known random satisfiability problems returns to the realm of stochastic local search algorithms.

Despite the effectiveness of Cube-and-Conquer (C&C) for solving challenging Boolean Satisfiability (SAT) problems, no prior work has shown that transformer-based models can learn effective cubing heuristics. We introduce a neuro-symbolic post-training framework for this task. We design an MCTS-based data curation pipeline that uses symbolic heuristics to explore splitting decisions over SAT competition formulas, producing preference data grounded in solver statistics and augmented with reasoning traces from a teacher model. Our two-stage post-training, supervised fine-tuning (SFT) followed by direct preference optimization (DPO), enables a 4B-parameter model to achieve a pass@5 score of 53 on 100 SAT competition benchmarks, surpassing frontier LLMs such as Claude-Sonnet-4 (50) and matching the best symbolic heuristic (53). Ablations show that SFT alone improves pass@5 from 46 to 51, with DPO adding 2 additional benchmarks; an entropy/agreement ablation on realized first-cube decisions further shows that SFT, not DPO, accounts for the root-level decision diversity that produces complementary per-run coverage over deterministic symbolic methods. This demonstrates that transformers can be trained to make effective cubing decisions in a domain traditionally dominated by symbolic methods.

We present a new algorithm for deciding formula entailment in orthologic (a sound approximation of classical logic) that avoids the costly preprocessing phase of prior implementations while retaining the same $\mathcal{O}(n^2(1+|A|))$ worst-case complexity. We then introduce a family of synthetic SAT benchmarks based on the observation that, for any formula $φ$, the equivalence $φ\leftrightarrow \mathrm{NF}_{\mathrm{OL}}(φ)$ is a tautology whose Tseitin encoding yields unsatisfiable instances that are hard for state-of-the-art SAT solvers yet have short orthologic proofs. Applied to EPFL arithmetic circuits, our algorithm solves these instances efficiently while Kissat times out on a significant fraction. Finally, we show that using orthologic normalization as a preprocessing step can improve SAT solving time on some hard problems.

Natural-language software requirements are often ambiguous, inconsistent, and underspecified; in safety-critical domains, these defects propagate into formal models that verify the wrong specification and into implementations that ship unsafe behavior. We show that large language models, equipped with an SMT solver, can audit such requirements: translating them into formal logic, detecting ambiguity through stochastic variation in the generated formalization, and exposing inconsistency, vacuousness, and safety violations through solver queries on the resulting specification. We present VERIMED, a neurosymbolic pipeline that operationalizes this idea for medical-device software requirements, and report two findings. First, stochastic variation across independent formalizations is a signal of ambiguity: requirements that admit multiple plausible interpretations produce SMT-inequivalent formalizations, and bidirectional SMT equivalence checking turns this disagreement into a solver-checkable test. Second, the usefulness of symbolic feedback depends on its granularity: in counterexample-guided repair on a hemodialysis question-answering benchmark, concrete SMT counterexamples raise verified accuracy from 55.4% to 98.5%. Over an extensive experimental evaluation on open-source hemodialysis safety requirements, we show that the LLM-based approach in VERIMED successfully reduces ambiguity-sensitive requirements and enables rigorous auditing of software requirements through SMT-based queries.

Determining the validity of a quantified Boolean formula (QBF) is a PSPACE-complete problem with rich expressive power. Despite interest in efficient solvers, there is, compared to problems in NP, a lack of positive theoretical results, and in the parameterized complexity setting one often has to restrict the quantifier prefix (e.g., bounding alternations) to obtain fixed parameter tractability (FPT). We propose a new parameter: the number of variables in clauses that has to be removed before reaching a tractable class (a clause covering (CC) backdoor). We are then interested in solving QBF in FPT time given a CC-backdoor of size $k$. We consider the three classical, tractable cases of QBF as base classes: Horn, 2-CNF, and linear equations. We establish W[1]-hardness for Horn but prove FPT for the others, and prove that in a precise, algebraic sense, we are only missing one important case for a full dichotomy. Our algorithms are non-trivial and depend on propagation, and Gaussian elimination, respectively, and are comparably unexplored for QBF.

Recently there has been an increasing interest in incorporating intensional'' functions in answer set programming. Intensional functions are those whose values can be described by other functions and predicates, rather than being pre-defined as in the standard answer set programming. We demonstrate that the functional stable model semantics plays an important role in the framework of Answer Set Programming Modulo Theories (ASPMT)'' -- a tight integration of answer set programming and satisfiability modulo theories, under which existing integration approaches can be viewed as special cases where the role of functions is limited. We show that ``tight'' ASPMT programs can be translated into SMT instances, which is similar to the known relationship between ASP and SAT.

Discrete variables are common in many applications, such as probabilistic reasoning, planning and explainable AI. When symbolic reasoning techniques are brought in to bear on these applications, a standard technique for handling discrete variables is to binarize them into Boolean variables to allow the use of Boolean computational machinery such as SAT solvers. This technique can face both computational and semantical challenges though. In this work, we develop a native SAT solver for discrete logic, which is a direct extension of Boolean logic in which variables can take arbitrary values. Our proposed solver has a similar design to Boolean SAT solvers, with ingredients such as unit resolution and clause learning but ones that operate natively on discrete variables. We illustrate the merits of the developed SAT solver by comparing it empirically to CSP solvers applied to discrete CNFs, to Boolean SAT solver applied to binarized CNFs, and to some hybrid solvers.

Bounded fitting is an attractive paradigm for learning logical formulas from labeled data examples that offers PAC-style generalization guarantees and can often be implemented leveraging SAT solvers. It has been successfully applied to learning concepts of the description logic ALC. We study bounded fitting for learning concepts in expressive description logics that extend ALC with inverse roles, qualified number restrictions, and feature comparisons. We investigate under which conditions bounded fitting keeps its favorable theoretical properties in this setting, and implement it using a SAT solver. We compare our tool with state-of-the-art concept learners with encouraging results, demonstrating that it is a practical approach to expressive concept learning.

Learning-based approaches to NP-hard problems have shown increasing promise, but their progress is fundamentally constrained by the high cost of generating labeled training data. In domains such as Boolean satisfiability (SAT), standard pipelines rely on solver-in-the-loop labeling, which scales poorly with problem size and limits the amount of usable supervision. This bottleneck hinders the broader goal of leveraging machine learning to capture structure in hard combinatorial problems. In this work, we propose a target-aware, solver-free data generation framework for SAT that produces correctly labeled SAT and UNSAT instances by construction, eliminating the need for expensive solver calls. Our method aligns generated instances with the structural properties of a target benchmark, making synthetic data effective for downstream learning. We further develop a linear-programming-aware graph neural network (LPGNN) architecture that incorporates constraint-violation residuals into message passing, enabling the model to exploit underlying optimization structure. Together, these contributions support a data-centric paradigm for learning on NP-hard problems, where scalable, task-aligned data generation is as critical as model design. Our approach yields orders-of-magnitude speedups in data generation, demonstrating that benchmark-aligned synthetic data can effectively augment solver-labeled datasets for GNN-based SAT prediction.

Trust in counterfactual explanations depends critically on whether their recommended changes are truly minimal: suboptimal explanations may vastly overshoot the actual changes needed to alter a decision, and heuristic errors can affect individuals unevenly, giving some users relevant recourse while assigning others unnecessarily costly recommendations. Consequently, we study the problem of computing optimal counterfactual explanations for tree ensembles under plausibility and actionability constraints. This is a combinatorial problem: for a fixed model, counterfactual search boils down to selecting consistent branching decisions and threshold-defined regions under a distance objective. We exploit this structure through CPCF, a constraint programming (CP) formulation in which numerical features are encoded as interval domains induced by split thresholds, while discrete features retain native finite-domain representations. This yields a compact finite-domain formulation that supports multiple distance objectives without continuous split-boundary search. We then place CPCF in a broader comparison across mathematical programming paradigms: we extend a maximum Boolean satisfiability (MaxSAT) formulation, originally designed for hard-voting random forests, to soft-voting ensembles, and compare against the current state-of-the-art mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) optimal approach. Across ten datasets and three types of tree ensembles, we analyze scalability, anytime performance, and sensitivity to distance metrics. We observe that CP achieves the best overall performance. More importantly, our results identify regimes in which the specific strengths of each paradigm make it best suited: CP is most versatile overall, MaxSAT handles hard-voting ensembles particularly well, and MILP remains competitive in amortized inference settings with a moderate number of split levels.

In satellite applications, user queries often take the form of open-ended natural language, extending beyond a fixed set of predefined categories. This open-vocabulary nature poses significant challenges for retrieving relevant image tiles, as the retrieval system must generalize to a wide range of unseen objects and concepts. While vision-language models (VLMs) such as CLIP are widely used for text-image retrieval, even fine-tuned variants often struggle to accurately align such queries with satellite imagery. To address this, we propose Open-SAT, a training-free query embedding refinement algorithm that operates at inference time to improve alignment between user queries and satellite image content. Open-SAT uses VLMs to compute embeddings for image tiles, which are stored in a vector database for efficient retrieval. At query time, it leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to refine the text embeddings by incorporating contextual information about objects of interest and their surroundings. A threshold-free retrieval mechanism further enhances accuracy and efficiency. Experimental results in three public benchmarks demonstrate that Open-SAT improves the F1 score by up to 16.04%, while retrieving a comparable number of image tiles. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of Open-SAT in open-vocabulary satellite image retrieval, leveraging LLM guidance without the need for additional training or supervision.

Graph neural networks have been widely used in Boolean satisfiability (SAT) tasks to learn structural information from SAT formulas. The goal of these studies is to solve SAT instances or to enhance SAT solvers, including tasks such as unsat-core prediction. However, most existing approaches model a SAT formula as a bipartite graph or a directed acyclic graph, which are less direct in capturing clause-level and higher-order interactions among literals and clauses. Moreover, these approaches are limited in modeling intrinsic polarity-related properties of SAT, such as the complementary relationship between the positive and negative literals of a variable. To address these limitations, we propose a polarity-aware representation learning framework over clause-literal hypergraphs. We model SAT formulas as clause-literal hypergraphs augmented with a clause incidence graph to capture higher-order structural interactions. We then introduce a polarity-aware decomposition mechanism that separates variable representations into polarity invariant and equivariant components, explicitly modeling the relationship between positive and negative literals, with the resulting literal representations propagated along the hypergraph structure. We further incorporate a polarity-inversion consistency regularization to reinforce polarity-consistent representations during training. Experimental results on multiple SAT datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Standard methods for aggregating natural language judgments, such as majority voting, often fail to produce logically consistent results when applied to high-conflict domains, treating differing opinions as noise. We propose a neuro-symbolic aggregation framework that formalizes conflict resolution through Weighted Maximum Satisfiability (MaxSAT). Our pipeline utilizes a language model to map unstructured natural language explanations into interpretable logical predicates and confidence weights. These components are then encoded as soft constraints within the Z3 solver, transforming the aggregation problem into an optimization task that seeks the maximum consistency across conflicting testimony. Using the Reddit r/AmItheAsshole forum as a case study in large-scale moral disagreement, our system generates logically coherent verdicts that diverge from popularity-based labels 62% of the time, corroborated by an 86% agreement rate with independent human evaluators. This study demonstrates the efficacy of coupling neural semantic extraction with formal solvers to enforce logical soundness and explainability in the aggregation of noisy human reasoning.

Designing the architecture of modern networked systems requires navigating a large, combinatorial space of hardware, systems, and configuration choices with complex cross-layer interactions. Architects must balance competing objectives such as performance, cost, and deployability while satisfying compatibility and resource constraints, often relying on scattered rules-of-thumb drawn from benchmarks, papers, documentation, and expert experience. This raises a natural question: can large language models (LLMs) reliably perform this kind of architectural reasoning? We find that they cannot. While LLMs produce plausible configurations, they frequently miss critical constraints, encode incorrect assumptions, and exhibit stickiness'' to familiar patterns. A natural workaround--iterative validation via simulation or experimentation--is often prohibitively expensive at scale and, in many cases, infeasible, particularly when comparing hardware-dependent alternatives. Motivated by this gap, we present Kepler, a lightweight reasoning framework for architecture design that combines structured, expert-driven specifications with SMT-based optimization. Kepler encodes architecturally significant properties--requirements, incompatibilities, and qualitative trade-offs--about systems, hardware, and workloads as constraints, and synthesizes feasible designs that optimize user-defined objectives. It operates at an abstract level, capturing rules-of-thumb'' rather than detailed system behavior, enabling tractable reasoning while preserving key interactions, and provides explanations for its decisions. Through experiments and case studies, we show that Kepler uncovers interactions missed by LLMs and supports systematic, explainable design exploration.

Optimization problems are fundamental in diverse fields, such as engineering, economics, and scientific computing. However, current algorithms are mostly designed for specific problem types and exhibit limited generality in solving multiple types of optimization problems. To enhance generality, we propose an automated reduction method named OP-to-MaxSAT reduction and a general optimization solver based on OP-to-MaxSAT reduction (GORED). GORED unifies the solving of multiple types of optimization problems by reducing the problems from optimization problems to MaxSAT instances in polynomial time and solving them using the state-of-the-art MaxSAT solver. The generality and solution quality of GORED are validated through experiments on 136 instances across 11 types of optimization problems. Experimental results demonstrate that GORED not only successfully solves a wide range of optimization problems but also yields solutions comparable in quality to those from existing methods, with no statistically significant differences observed. By introducing automated reduction, this work shifts the paradigm of optimization solvers from designing specialized algorithms for each problem type to employing a single algorithm for diverse problems. As a result, advances in this single algorithm can now drive progress in a wide range of optimization problems across various domains.

We study synthesis for obligation properties expressed in LTLfp, the extension of LTLf to infinite traces. Obligation properties are positive Boolean combinations of safety and guarantee (co-safety) properties and form the second level of the temporal hierarchy of Manna and Pnueli. Although obligation properties are expressed over infinite traces, they retain most of the simplicity of LTLf. In particular, we show that they admit a translation into symbolically represented deterministic weak automata (DWA) obtained directly from the symbolic deterministic finite automata (DFA) for the underlying LTLf properties on trace prefixes. DWA inherit many of the attractive algorithmic features of DFA, including Boolean closure and polynomial-time minimization. Moreover, we show that synthesis for LTLfp obligation properties is theoretically highly efficient - solvable in linear time once the DWA is constructed. We investigate several symbolic algorithms for solving DWA games that arise in the synthesis of obligation properties and evaluate their effectiveness experimentally. Overall, the results indicate that synthesis for LTLfp obligation properties can be performed with virtually the same effectiveness as LTLf synthesis.

Equality saturation (EqSat) is a powerful optimization paradigm that compactly represents many equivalent programs in an e-graph and delays commitment until extraction selects a lowest-cost program. Making EqSat effective, therefore, requires not only domain-specific rewrite rules but also domain-specific strategies. Today, much of this strategy design is still manual, making it a major obstacle to automating e-graph-based compilers. Recent rule-synthesis frameworks can automatically infer large rewrite vocabularies from semantic specifications, but they also enlarge the rewrite space and further exacerbate e-graph explosion. Although large language models (LLMs) make automated strategy synthesis plausible, directly evolving backend code remains ineffective in practice. The search lacks reusable strategy abstractions and actionable feedback, and can easily trigger e-graph explosion or converge to poor designs. We present EggMind, an LLM-guided, end-to-end framework for synthesizing reusable EqSat strategies. At its core, EggMind introduces a domain-specific language, EqSatL, to represent EqSat strategies as explicit and inspectable artifacts. It then proposes an LLM-guided agentic workflow, equipped with novel techniques including proof-derived rewrite motif caching and tractability guidance, to search efficiently for high-quality strategies while keeping synthesis stable under e-graph growth. Evaluation shows that EggMind substantially improves the resource-quality trade-off on vectorization benchmarks, reducing final cost by 45.1% and peak RAM by 69.1% relative to full EqSat. We further show that the same methodology transfers effectively to an XLA-based tensor compiler, and demonstrate its practical potential in a logic-synthesis case study with augmented rewrite spaces.

In active learning, membership queries (MQs) allow a learner to pose questions to a teacher, such as ''Is every apple a fruit?'', to which the teacher responds correctly with yes or no. These MQs can be viewed as subsumption tests with respect to the target ontology. Inspired by the standard reduction of subsumption to satisfiability in description logics, we reformulate each candidate axiom into its corresponding counter-concept and verbalise it in controlled natural language before presenting it to Large Language Models (LLMs). We introduce LLMs as a third component that provides real-world examples approximating an instance of the counter-concept. This design property ensures that only Type II errors may occur in ontology modelling; in the worst case, these errors merely delay the construction process without introducing inconsistencies. Experimental results on 13 commercial LLMs show that recall, corresponding to Type II errors in our framework, remains stable across several well-established ontologies.

Foundational optimization embeddings have recently emerged as powerful pre-trained representations for mixed-integer programming (MIP) problems. These embeddings were shown to enable cross-domain transfer and reduce reliance on solver-generated labels. In this work, we investigate whether such representations generalize beyond optimization to decision problems, focusing on Boolean satisfiability (SAT). We adapt the foundational optimization architecture to SAT by mapping CNF formulas into the same bipartite constraint-variable graph representation used for MIPs. This allows direct reuse of the pre-trained embedding model without architectural changes or supervised fine-tuning. Our results show that these embeddings capture structural regularities in SAT instances and support unsupervised tasks such as instance clustering and distribution identification. We demonstrate, for the first time, that foundational optimization embeddings can transfer to constraint satisfaction domains. Our findings is a step toward a unified representational framework for both optimization and decision problems.

Large language models frequently produce mutually inconsistent answers when reasoning over multiple related queries. We study case-file logical consistency: maintaining a globally satisfiable belief state across interdependent queries. We introduce a benchmark of 390 multi-query reasoning instances with entailment/contradiction/unknown labels and propose set-level metrics including Case Satisfiability Rate, Contradiction Density and Revision Cost. Our solver-augmented approach extracts commitments, verifies global satisfiability and performs counterexample-guided repair. Across four reasoning domains, our method substantially reduces cross-query contradictions (SetCons: 0.56 to 0.94) while preserving per-query accuracy, demonstrating that global coherence is critical for robust multi-query reasoning.

LLMs excel at reasoning, but validating their steps remains challenging. Formal verification offers a solution through mechanically checkable proofs. Interactive theorem provers (ITPs) dominate mathematical reasoning but require detailed low-level proof steps, while auto-active verifiers offer automation but focus on software verification. Recent work has begun bridging this divide by evaluating LLMs for software verification in ITPs, but the complementary direction, LLMs for mathematical theorem proving in auto-active verifiers, remains unexplored. We present MINIF2F-DAFNY, the first translation of the widely-used mathematical benchmark miniF2F to an auto-active verifier: Dafny. We find that Dafny's automation alone solves 39-44% of problems with empty proofs, whereas many require substantial proof guidance in ITPs. We evaluate 8 off-the-shelf LLMs on proof generation, with the best model (Claude Opus 4.6) achieving 62.7% cumulative pass@4 on the full test set, improving over the 38.9% empty-proof baseline by 23.8 percentage points. These results show that auto-active verification offers a complementary empirical setting for AI-assisted mathematical reasoning, where LLMs provide high-level guidance while SMT automation handles low-level details. Our benchmark and evaluation infrastructure are publicly available on https://github.com/dafny-lang/miniF2F.