Fix handling of Boolean term variables (#4550)

Fix handling of Boolean term variables (#4550)

Fixes #4446. This commit fixes two issues related to the handling of
Boolean term variables:

Removing Boolean subterms and replacing them with a Boolean term
variable introduces an equality of the form (= v t) where v is the
Boolean term variable and t is the term. It is important that these
equalities do not get removed. This commit changes
Theory::isLegalElimination() to take this into account.

The incorrect model reported in the issue was caused by some of the
Boolean term variables not being assigned values by the SAT solver
when we decided that the benchmark is satisfiable. Our justification
heuristic (correctly) decided that it is enough to satisfy one of the
disjuncts in the assertion to satisfy the whole assertion. However,
the assignments that we received from the SAT solver restricted us to
pick a specific value for one of the Boolean constants:

Literal | Value | Expr
---------------------------------------------------------
'7 ' 0 c
'0 ' 1 true
'1 ' 0 false
'2 ' 0 (a BOOLEAN_TERM_VARIABLE_274)
'5 ' _ b
'3 ' 1 (a BOOLEAN_TERM_VARIABLE_277)
'4 ' _ BOOLEAN_TERM_VARIABLE_274
'6 ' 0 BOOLEAN_TERM_VARIABLE_277
This meant that we had to pick true for BOOLEAN_TERM_VARIABLE_274
but we picked false since we simply treated it as an unassigned
variable. In general, the justification heuristic handles embedded
skolems introduced by term removal first and asks the SAT solver to
decide on Boolean term variables. However, for some logics, such as
QF_AUFLIA, we use the justification heuristic not for decisions but
only to decide when to stop, so those decisions were not done. This
commit introduces a conservative fix that adds a check after
satsifying all the assertions that makes sure that the equalities
introduced for Boolean terms are satisfied as well. Due to the eager
treatment of Boolean term variables when we use the justification
heuristic also for decisions, it is likely that we don't really have
the problem in that case but it doesn't hurt to enable the fix. It is
also possible that this fix is only required with models but it is
definitely safer to just always enable it (there could be tricky
corner cases involving the theory combination between UF and Boolean
terms). Additionally, this commit changes the ITE-specific naming in
the justification heuristic to reflect more accurately that we are in
general dealing with skolems introduced by term removals and not only
due to ITE removal.