Learning-Based Graph Partitioning and Incremental Formal Verification for Scalable Optimization of Large-Scale Digital Circuits
Keywords:
graph partitioning, formal verification, incremental verification, logic synthesis, large-scale circuits, machine learning, design automation, socio-technical infrastructureAbstract
Large-scale digital circuits now routinely contain hundreds of millions of gates, making scalable optimization, synthesis, and verification central problems in electronic design automation. Graph partitioning has long served as a foundational technique for decomposing these designs into manageable subproblems, yet classical partitioning objectives do not always align with the semantic and temporal dependencies that dominate formal verification. This paper examines the integration of learning-based graph partitioning with incremental formal verification as a system-level strategy for scalable optimization of large-scale digital circuits. It argues that partitioning should be understood not merely as a preprocessing heuristic but as an architectural decision that shapes verification cost, design reproducibility, infrastructure demand, and organizational governance. The discussion connects classical partitioning theory, symbolic model checking, satisfiability-based verification, logic synthesis, and graph representation learning. Particular attention is given to incremental verification, where partitioned artifacts are reused across design revisions, and to the structural trade-offs between partition granularity, cross-boundary communication, and proof stability. The paper also considers deployment in cloud and heterogeneous compute environments, robustness under noisy or incomplete design data, fairness in access to verification infrastructure, and policy implications for safety-critical semiconductor supply chains. Cross-domain comparisons with distributed computing, database sharding, and cyber-physical systems illustrate how partitioning decisions cascade across technical and institutional layers. The conclusion proposes that scalable circuit verification requires a socio-technical architecture in which learned partitioning, incremental proof management, and governance frameworks co-evolve. By treating graph partitioning and formal verification as coupled infrastructure rather than isolated algorithms, the paper outlines a research agenda for sustainable, robust, and equitable large-scale digital design.
References
1. Alpert, C. J., & Kahng, A. B. (1995). Recent directions in netlist partitioning: A survey. Integration, the VLSI Journal, 19(1-2), 1-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9260(95)00008-4
2. Karypis, G., & Kumar, V. (1998). A fast and high quality multilevel scheme for partitioning irregular graphs. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 20(1), 359-392. https://doi.org/10.1137/S1064827595287997
3. Hendrickson, B., & Leland, R. (1995). A multilevel algorithm for partitioning graphs. In Proceedings of the 1995 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing (pp. 28-es). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/224170.224228
4. Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., & Peled, D. A. (1999). Model checking. MIT Press.
5. Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E. M., & Zhu, Y. (1999). Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (pp. 193-207). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49059-0_14
6. McMillan, K. L. (1993). Symbolic model checking. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
7. Bryant, R. E. (1986). Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-35(8), 677-691. https://doi.org/10.1109/TC.1986.1676819
8. Kernighan, B. W., & Lin, S. (1970). An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs. Bell System Technical Journal, 49(2), 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1970.tb01770.x
9. Thorat, Kiran, et al. "GROOT: Graph edge re-growth and partitioning for the verification of large designs in logic synthesis." 2025 IEEE/ACM International Conference On Computer Aided Design (ICCAD). IEEE, 2025.
10. Fiduccia, C. M., & Mattheyses, R. M. (1982). A linear-time heuristic for improving network partitions. In Proceedings of the 19th Design Automation Conference (pp. 175-181). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1145/800263.809204
11. Kahng, A. B., Lienig, J., Markov, I. L., & Hu, J. (2011). VLSI physical design: From graph partitioning to timing closure. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9591-6
12. Bui, T. N., Chaudhuri, S., Leighton, F. T., & Sipser, M. (1987). Graph bisection algorithms with good average case behavior. Combinatorica, 7(2), 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02579448
13. Simon, H. D., & Teng, S.-H. (1997). How good is recursive bisection? SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 18(5), 1436-1445. https://doi.org/10.1137/S1064827593255135
14. Brayton, R. K., Hachtel, G. D., McMullen, C. T., & Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A. L. (1984). Logic minimization algorithms for VLSI synthesis. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
15. Sentovich, E. M., Singh, K. J., Lavagno, L., Moon, C., Murgai, R., Saldanha, A., Savoj, H., Stephan, P. R., Brayton, R. K., & Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A. (1992). SIS: A system for sequential circuit synthesis. University of California, Berkeley.
16. Mishchenko, A., Chatterjee, S., & Brayton, R. (2006). DAG-aware AIG rewriting: A fresh look at combinational logic synthesis. In Proceedings of the 43rd Design Automation Conference (pp. 532-535). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1146909.1147048
17. Amaru, L., Gaillardon, P.-E., & De Micheli, G. (2016). The EPFL combinational benchmark suite. In Proceedings of the 24th International Workshop on Logic and Synthesis.
18. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436-444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539
19. Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., Dieleman, S., Grewe, D., Nham, J., Kalchbrenner, N., Sutskever, I., Lillicrap, T., Leach, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., Graepel, T., & Hassabis, D. (2016). Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529(7587), 484-489. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16961
20. Kipf, T. N., & Welling, M. (2017). Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations.
21. Hamilton, W. L., Ying, R., & Leskovec, J. (2017). Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 1024-1034).
22. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 5998-6008).
23. Dally, W. J., & Towles, B. (2004). Principles and practices of interconnection networks. Morgan Kaufmann.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Computer Science and Engineering Transactions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
