From c9eecce14921a315d7c617c3179d5245d029f72e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Martin Suda <sudam@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 18:47:31 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] fixing the ommisions in implemting model minimization option
 for avatar

---
 SAT/MinimizingSolver.cpp |  2 +-
 Saturation/SSplitter.cpp | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
 Saturation/SSplitter.hpp |  6 ++++--
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/SAT/MinimizingSolver.cpp b/SAT/MinimizingSolver.cpp
index 205852332c..942f46f877 100644
--- a/SAT/MinimizingSolver.cpp
+++ b/SAT/MinimizingSolver.cpp
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ void MinimizingSolver::addClauses(SATClauseIterator cit, bool onlyPropagate,bool
   // and not adding clauses to _unprocessed should only result in more variables being marked
   // as DONT_CARE (if they only appear in clauses not to be used in the partial model)
   // - Giles
-  if(useInPartialModel){
+  if(useInPartialModel || ! _splitclausesonly ) {
     //we need to filter out the empty clause -- it won't have any influence on our algorithm
     //(as it will make the problem unsat and we process only satisfiale assignment), but it
     //is a corner case that needs to be handled
diff --git a/Saturation/SSplitter.cpp b/Saturation/SSplitter.cpp
index fead3fc7f3..242fdaf1ac 100644
--- a/Saturation/SSplitter.cpp
+++ b/Saturation/SSplitter.cpp
@@ -230,7 +230,9 @@ void SSplittingBranchSelector::updateSelection(unsigned satVar, SATSolver::VarAs
 
 }
 
-void SSplittingBranchSelector::addSatClauses(const SATClauseStack& clauses,
+void SSplittingBranchSelector::addSatClauses(
+        const SATClauseStack& regularClauses,
+        const SATClauseStack& conflictClauses,
     SplitLevelStack& addedComps, SplitLevelStack& removedComps)
 {
   CALL("SSplittingBranchSelector::addSatClauses");
@@ -242,12 +244,13 @@ void SSplittingBranchSelector::addSatClauses(const SATClauseStack& clauses,
 //  _unprocessed.loadFromIterator(
 //      getFilteredIterator(SATClauseStack::ConstIterator(clauses), hasPositiveLiteral) );
 
-  RSTAT_CTR_INC_MANY("ssat_sat_clauses",clauses.size());
+  RSTAT_CTR_INC_MANY("ssat_sat_clauses",regularClauses.size()+conflictClauses.size());
 //  RSTAT_CTR_INC_MANY("ssat_sat_clauses_with_positive",_unprocessed.size());
   {
     TimeCounter tc1(TC_SAT_SOLVER);
     // We do use split clauses in the partial model
-    _solver->addClauses(pvi( SATClauseStack::ConstIterator(clauses) ), false,true);
+    _solver->addClauses(pvi( SATClauseStack::ConstIterator(regularClauses) ), false,true);
+    _solver->addClauses(pvi( SATClauseStack::ConstIterator(conflictClauses) ), false,false);
     processDPConflicts();
   }
 
@@ -426,8 +429,11 @@ void SSplitter::addSATClause(SATClause* cl, bool branchRefutation)
   }
   if(branchRefutation) {
     _haveBranchRefutation = true;
+    _conflictClausesToBeAdded.push(cl);
+  } else {
+    _regularClausesToBeAdded.push(cl);
   }
-  _clausesToBeAdded.push(cl);
+  
 }
 
 void SSplitter::onAllProcessed()
@@ -439,7 +445,8 @@ void SSplitter::onAllProcessed()
     if(_haveBranchRefutation) {
       _flushThreshold = _sa->getGeneratedClauseCount()+_flushPeriod;
     }
-    if(_sa->getGeneratedClauseCount()>=_flushThreshold && _clausesToBeAdded.isEmpty()) {
+    if(_sa->getGeneratedClauseCount()>=_flushThreshold && 
+            _regularClausesToBeAdded.isEmpty() && _conflictClausesToBeAdded.isEmpty()) {
       flushing = true;
       _flushThreshold = _sa->getGeneratedClauseCount()+_flushPeriod;
       _flushPeriod = static_cast<unsigned>(_flushPeriod*_flushQuotient);
@@ -448,7 +455,7 @@ void SSplitter::onAllProcessed()
 
   _haveBranchRefutation = false;
 
-  if(_clausesToBeAdded.isEmpty() && !flushing) {
+  if(_regularClausesToBeAdded.isEmpty() && _conflictClausesToBeAdded.isEmpty() && !flushing) {
     return;
   }
   static SplitLevelStack toAdd;
@@ -459,8 +466,9 @@ void SSplitter::onAllProcessed()
     _branchSelector.flush(toAdd, toRemove);
   }
   else {
-    _branchSelector.addSatClauses(_clausesToBeAdded, toAdd, toRemove);
-    _clausesToBeAdded.reset();
+    _branchSelector.addSatClauses(_regularClausesToBeAdded,_conflictClausesToBeAdded, toAdd, toRemove);
+    _regularClausesToBeAdded.reset();
+    _conflictClausesToBeAdded.reset();
   }
 
   if(toRemove.isNonEmpty()) {
diff --git a/Saturation/SSplitter.hpp b/Saturation/SSplitter.hpp
index 9840295447..cd87f41587 100644
--- a/Saturation/SSplitter.hpp
+++ b/Saturation/SSplitter.hpp
@@ -49,7 +49,8 @@ class SSplittingBranchSelector {
   void init();
 
   void updateVarCnt();
-  void addSatClauses(const SATClauseStack& clauses, SplitLevelStack& addedComps, SplitLevelStack& removedComps);
+  void addSatClauses(const SATClauseStack& regularClauses, const SATClauseStack& conflictClauses,
+                     SplitLevelStack& addedComps, SplitLevelStack& removedComps);
 
   void flush(SplitLevelStack& addedComps, SplitLevelStack& removedComps);
   void clearZeroImpliedSplits(Clause* cl);
@@ -233,7 +234,8 @@ class SSplitter : public Splitter {
    * in the saturation algorithm (and so we'll be able to maintain the
    * correspondence between the SAT model and the clauses in the saturation).
    */
-  SATClauseStack _clausesToBeAdded;
+  SATClauseStack _regularClausesToBeAdded;
+  SATClauseStack _conflictClausesToBeAdded;
 };
 
 }