Satisfiability in the context of "Satisfiability modulo theories"

In logic and computer science, the Boolean satisfiability problem (sometimes called propositional satisfiability problem and abbreviated SATISFIABILITY, SAT or B-SAT) asks whether there exists an interpretation that satisfies a given Boolean formula. In other words, it asks whether the formula's variables can be consistently replaced by the values TRUE or FALSE to make the formula evaluate to TRUE. If this is the case, the formula is called satisfiable, else unsatisfiable. For example, the formula "a AND NOT b" is satisfiable because one can find the values a = TRUE and b = FALSE, which make (a AND NOT b) = TRUE. In contrast, "a AND NOT a" is unsatisfiable.

SAT is the first problem that was proven to be NP-complete—this is the Cook–Levin theorem. This means that all problems in the complexity class NP, which includes a wide range of natural decision and optimization problems, are at most as difficult to solve as SAT. There is no known algorithm that efficiently solves each SAT problem (where "efficiently" means "deterministically in polynomial time"). Although such an algorithm is generally believed not to exist, this belief has not been proven or disproven mathematically. Resolving the question of whether SAT has a polynomial-time algorithm would settle the P versus NP problem - one of the most important open problems in the theory of computing.

In mathematical logic, a universal quantification is a type of quantifier, a logical constant which is interpreted as "given any", "for all", "for every", or "given an arbitrary element". It expresses that a predicate can be satisfied by every member of a domain of discourse. In other words, it is the predication of a property or relation to every member of the domain. It asserts that a predicate within the scope of a universal quantifier is true of every value of a predicate variable.

It is usually denoted by the turned A (∀) logical operator symbol, which, when used together with a predicate variable, is called a universal quantifier ("∀x", "∀(x)", or sometimes by "(x)" alone). Universal quantification is distinct from existential quantification ("there exists"), which only asserts that the property or relation holds for at least one member of the domain.

In computer science, an action language is a language for specifying state transition systems, and is commonly used to create formal models of the effects of actions on the world. Action languages are commonly used in the artificial intelligence and robotics domains, where they describe how actions affect the states of systems over time, and may be used for automated planning.

Action languages fall into two classes: action description languages and action query languages. Examples of the former include STRIPS, PDDL, Language A (a generalization of STRIPS; the propositional part of Pednault's ADL), Language B (an extension of A adding indirect effects, distinguishing static and dynamic laws) and Language C (which adds indirect effects also, and does not assume that every fluent is automatically "inertial"). There are also the Action Query Languages P, Q and R. Several different algorithms exist for converting action languages, and in particular, action language C, to answer set programs. Since modern answer-set solvers make use of boolean SAT algorithms to very rapidly ascertain satisfiability, this implies that action languages can also enjoy the progress being made in the domain of boolean SAT solving.

In mathematics and logic, a vacuous truth is a conditional or universal statement (specifically a universal statement that can be converted to a conditional statement) that is true because the antecedent cannot be satisfied.

It is sometimes said that a statement is vacuously true because it does not really say anything. For example, the statement "all cell phones in the room are turned off" (alternatively said "for all x in this room, if x is a cellphone then x is turned off") will be true when no cell phones are present in the room. In this case, the statement "all cell phones in the room are turned on" would also be vacuously true, as would the conjunction of the two: "all cell phones in the room are turned on and all cell phones in the room are turned off", which would otherwise be incoherent and false.