This section presents the ranking of the different solvers. Solvers are ranked on the number of solved instances, i.e. where a final answer was given. Ties are broken by considering the minimum total solution time.
Solvers which gave a wrong answer in a category are excluded from the ranking in that category.
The Virtual Best Solver (VBS) is a theoretical construction which returns the best answer provided by one of the submitted solver. It corresponds to the 'Best result' column in the bench per bench view of the results. It can be considered as a meta solver which uses a perfect oracle to guess instantaneously which of the submitted solver will be the most efficient to solve the instance. Another way to look at it is to consider this VBS as a solver which would run all other solvers in parallel, bringing together all the solvers strenghs. This VBS is essentially the same notion as State Of The Art (SOTA) solver defined in "Evaluating general purpose automated theorem proving systems", Artificial Intelligence, Volume 131, Issues 1-2, September 2001, Pages 39-54 Geoff Sutcliffe, Christian Suttner. However, SOTA is a more general notion: the VBS can be seen as the least powerful SOTA solver.
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | Detail | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 208 | |||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 201 | 200 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 97% | 100% | 12809.37 | 3.06 | 63.73 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 172 | 172 MOPT | 83% | 86% | 19330.77 | 1.34 | 112.39 | 9971.83 | 1.02 | 57.98 | 1.94 |
| 2 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 159 | 158 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 76% | 79% | 18426.08 | 1.41 | 115.89 | 18488.96 | 1.42 | 116.28 | 1.00 |
| 3 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 158 | 157 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 76% | 79% | 66253.55 | 359.25 | 419.33 | 66449.44 | 360.19 | 420.57 | 1.00 |
| 4 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 157 | 156 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 75% | 78% | 62688.82 | 359.22 | 399.29 | 62881.87 | 360.15 | 400.52 | 1.00 |
| 5 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 146 | 145 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 70% | 73% | 12612.25 | 3.08 | 86.39 | 12651.93 | 3.10 | 86.66 | 1.00 |
| 6 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 144 | 143 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 69% | 72% | 29406.93 | 3.71 | 204.21 | 29488.90 | 3.73 | 204.78 | 1.00 |
| 7 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 133 | 132 MOPT, 1 UNSAT | 64% | 66% | 4098.86 | 1.88 | 30.82 | 3913.55 | 1.03 | 29.43 | 1.05 |
| 8 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 115 | 115 MOPT | 55% | 57% | 9180.35 | 1.35 | 79.83 | 8961.51 | 0.79 | 77.93 | 1.02 |
| 9 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 208 | ||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 200 | 96% | 100% | 12806.31 | 0.00 | 64.03 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 172 | 83% | 86% | 19330.77 | 1.34 | 112.39 | 9971.83 | 1.02 | 57.98 | 1.94 |
| 2 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 158 | 76% | 79% | 18397.79 | 1.40 | 116.44 | 18460.34 | 1.42 | 116.84 | 1.00 |
| 3 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 157 | 75% | 79% | 65868.42 | 359.24 | 419.54 | 66063.22 | 360.17 | 420.78 | 1.00 |
| 4 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 156 | 75% | 78% | 62306.22 | 359.22 | 399.40 | 62498.12 | 360.15 | 400.63 | 1.00 |
| 5 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 145 | 70% | 73% | 12608.46 | 3.05 | 86.95 | 12648.13 | 3.07 | 87.23 | 1.00 |
| 6 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 143 | 69% | 72% | 29403.87 | 3.71 | 205.62 | 29485.83 | 3.73 | 206.19 | 1.00 |
| 7 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 132 | 63% | 66% | 4045.91 | 1.87 | 30.65 | 3862.72 | 1.02 | 29.26 | 1.05 |
| 8 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 115 | 55% | 58% | 9180.35 | 1.35 | 79.83 | 8961.51 | 0.79 | 77.93 | 1.02 |
| 9 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 208 | ||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 1 | 0% | 100% | 3.06 | 3.06 | 3.06 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 3.06 | 3.06 | 3.06 | 3.07 | 3.07 | 3.07 | 1.00 |
| 2 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 3.79 | 3.79 | 3.79 | 3.80 | 3.80 | 3.80 | 1.00 |
| 3 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 28.29 | 28.29 | 28.29 | 28.62 | 28.62 | 28.62 | 0.99 |
| 4 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 52.95 | 52.95 | 52.95 | 50.83 | 50.83 | 50.83 | 1.04 |
| 5 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 382.59 | 382.59 | 382.59 | 383.76 | 383.76 | 383.76 | 1.00 |
| 6 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 1 | 0% | 100% | 385.14 | 385.14 | 385.14 | 386.22 | 386.22 | 386.22 | 1.00 |
| 7 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 8 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 9 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | Detail | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 60 | |||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 59 | 59 MOPT | 98% | 100% | 859.51 | 0.00 | 14.57 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 59 | 59 MOPT | 98% | 100% | 25300.57 | 359.32 | 428.82 | 25377.79 | 360.40 | 430.13 | 1.00 |
| 2 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 58 | 58 MOPT | 97% | 98% | 7848.09 | 2.18 | 135.31 | 3978.91 | 1.40 | 68.60 | 1.97 |
| 3 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 58 | 58 MOPT | 97% | 98% | 22514.52 | 359.34 | 388.18 | 22582.88 | 360.37 | 389.36 | 1.00 |
| 4 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 49 | 49 MOPT | 82% | 83% | 7279.12 | 2.62 | 148.55 | 7304.81 | 2.64 | 149.08 | 1.00 |
| 5 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 41 | 41 MOPT | 68% | 69% | 3831.56 | 11.72 | 93.45 | 3745.02 | 8.39 | 91.34 | 1.02 |
| 6 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 35 | 35 MOPT | 58% | 59% | 4770.45 | 50.15 | 136.30 | 4784.49 | 50.31 | 136.70 | 1.00 |
| 7 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 32 | 32 MOPT | 53% | 54% | 984.99 | 0.89 | 30.78 | 955.17 | 0.54 | 29.85 | 1.03 |
| 8 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 15 | 15 MOPT | 25% | 25% | 8565.46 | 405.92 | 571.03 | 8589.51 | 406.90 | 572.63 | 1.00 |
| 9 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 60 | ||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 59 | 98% | 100% | 859.51 | 0.00 | 14.57 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 59 | 98% | 100% | 25300.57 | 359.32 | 428.82 | 25377.79 | 360.40 | 430.13 | 1.00 |
| 2 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 58 | 97% | 98% | 7848.09 | 2.18 | 135.31 | 3978.91 | 1.40 | 68.60 | 1.97 |
| 3 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 58 | 97% | 98% | 22514.52 | 359.34 | 388.18 | 22582.88 | 360.37 | 389.36 | 1.00 |
| 4 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 49 | 82% | 83% | 7279.12 | 2.62 | 148.55 | 7304.81 | 2.64 | 149.08 | 1.00 |
| 5 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 41 | 68% | 69% | 3831.56 | 11.72 | 93.45 | 3745.02 | 8.39 | 91.34 | 1.02 |
| 6 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 35 | 58% | 59% | 4770.45 | 50.15 | 136.30 | 4784.49 | 50.31 | 136.70 | 1.00 |
| 7 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 32 | 53% | 54% | 984.99 | 0.89 | 30.78 | 955.17 | 0.54 | 29.85 | 1.03 |
| 8 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 15 | 25% | 25% | 8565.46 | 405.92 | 571.03 | 8589.51 | 406.90 | 572.63 | 1.00 |
| 9 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| Rank | Solver | Version | Number of solved instances | % of all instances | % of VBS | Cumulated CPU time on solved instances | Median CPU time | Average CPU time per solved instance | Cumulated WC time on solved instances | Median WC time | Average WC time per solved instance | CPU/WC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of instances in the category: 60 | ||||||||||||
| Virtual Best Solver (VBS) | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 1 | Exact | 2025-06-02 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 2 | Exact_no_dombreaking | 2025-06-16 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 3 | NaPS | naps-1.03a6 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 4 | PRINTEMPS | 2025-05-28 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 5 | Sat4j Resolution | 2025-06-06 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 6 | Sat4j CP | 2025-06-06 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 7 | SCIP | 2024-07-07 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 8 | toulbar2 | 2025-06-13 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
| 9 | OR-Tools CP-SAT | 9.14.2 | 0 | 0% | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - |
This section presents the ranking of the different solvers. Solvers are ranked on the number of instances for which they were able to find the best solution obtained by one the solvers within the global time limit. Ties are broken using the cumulated T1 time.
Solvers which gave a wrong answer in a category are excluded from the ranking in that category.
The Virtual Best Solver (VBS) is a theoretical construction which returns the best answer provided by one of the submitted solver. It corresponds to the 'Best result' column in the bench per bench view of the results. It can be considered as a meta solver which uses a perfect oracle to guess instantaneously which of the submitted solver will be the most efficient to solve the instance. Another way to look at it is to consider this VBS as a solver which would run all other solvers in parallel, bringing together all the solvers strenghs. This VBS is essentially the same notion as State Of The Art (SOTA) solver defined in "Evaluating general purpose automated theorem proving systems", Artificial Intelligence, Volume 131, Issues 1-2, September 2001, Pages 39-54 Geoff Sutcliffe, Christian Suttner. However, SOTA is a more general notion: the VBS can be seen as the least powerful SOTA solver.
This section presents the ranking of the different solvers. Solvers are ranked on the number of instances for which they were able to find the best solution obtained by one the solvers within 2 times the VBS time. Ties are broken using the cumulated T1 time.
Solvers which gave a wrong answer in a category are excluded from the ranking in that category.
The Virtual Best Solver (VBS) is a theoretical construction which returns the best answer provided by one of the submitted solver. It corresponds to the 'Best result' column in the bench per bench view of the results. It can be considered as a meta solver which uses a perfect oracle to guess instantaneously which of the submitted solver will be the most efficient to solve the instance. Another way to look at it is to consider this VBS as a solver which would run all other solvers in parallel, bringing together all the solvers strenghs. This VBS is essentially the same notion as State Of The Art (SOTA) solver defined in "Evaluating general purpose automated theorem proving systems", Artificial Intelligence, Volume 131, Issues 1-2, September 2001, Pages 39-54 Geoff Sutcliffe, Christian Suttner. However, SOTA is a more general notion: the VBS can be seen as the least powerful SOTA solver.
This section presents the ranking of the different solvers. Solvers are ranked on the number of instances for which they were able to find the best solution obtained by one the solvers within 4 times the VBS time. Ties are broken using the cumulated T1 time.
Solvers which gave a wrong answer in a category are excluded from the ranking in that category.
The Virtual Best Solver (VBS) is a theoretical construction which returns the best answer provided by one of the submitted solver. It corresponds to the 'Best result' column in the bench per bench view of the results. It can be considered as a meta solver which uses a perfect oracle to guess instantaneously which of the submitted solver will be the most efficient to solve the instance. Another way to look at it is to consider this VBS as a solver which would run all other solvers in parallel, bringing together all the solvers strenghs. This VBS is essentially the same notion as State Of The Art (SOTA) solver defined in "Evaluating general purpose automated theorem proving systems", Artificial Intelligence, Volume 131, Issues 1-2, September 2001, Pages 39-54 Geoff Sutcliffe, Christian Suttner. However, SOTA is a more general notion: the VBS can be seen as the least powerful SOTA solver.
This section presents the ranking of the different solvers. Solvers are ranked on the number of instances for which they were able to find the best solution obtained by one the solvers within 8 times the VBS time. Ties are broken using the cumulated T1 time.
Solvers which gave a wrong answer in a category are excluded from the ranking in that category.
The Virtual Best Solver (VBS) is a theoretical construction which returns the best answer provided by one of the submitted solver. It corresponds to the 'Best result' column in the bench per bench view of the results. It can be considered as a meta solver which uses a perfect oracle to guess instantaneously which of the submitted solver will be the most efficient to solve the instance. Another way to look at it is to consider this VBS as a solver which would run all other solvers in parallel, bringing together all the solvers strenghs. This VBS is essentially the same notion as State Of The Art (SOTA) solver defined in "Evaluating general purpose automated theorem proving systems", Artificial Intelligence, Volume 131, Issues 1-2, September 2001, Pages 39-54 Geoff Sutcliffe, Christian Suttner. However, SOTA is a more general notion: the VBS can be seen as the least powerful SOTA solver.