Proving Correctness of Imperative Programs by Linearizing Constrained Horn Clauses

We present a method for verifying the correctness of imperative programs which is based on the automated transformation of their specifications. Given a program prog, we consider a partial correctness specification of the form $\{\varphi\}$ prog $\{\psi\}$, where the assertions $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are predicates defined by a set Spec of possibly recursive Horn clauses with linear arithmetic (LA) constraints in their premise (also called constrained Horn clauses). The verification method consists in constructing a set PC of constrained Horn clauses whose satisfiability implies that $\{\varphi\}$ prog $\{\psi\}$ is valid. We highlight some limitations of state-of-the-art constrained Horn clause solving methods, here called LA-solving methods, which prove the satisfiability of the clauses by looking for linear arithmetic interpretations of the predicates. In particular, we prove that there exist some specifications that cannot be proved valid by any of those LA-solving methods. These specifications require the proof of satisfiability of a set PC of constrained Horn clauses that contain nonlinear clauses (that is, clauses with more than one atom in their premise). Then, we present a transformation, called linearization, that converts PC into a set of linear clauses (that is, clauses with at most one atom in their premise). We show that several specifications that could not be proved valid by LA-solving methods, can be proved valid after linearization. We also present a strategy for performing linearization in an automatic way and we report on some experimental results obtained by using a preliminary implementation of our method.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), Proceedings of ICLP 201

Large induced subgraphs via triangulations and CMSO

We obtain an algorithmic meta-theorem for the following optimization problem. Let \phi\ be a Counting Monadic Second Order Logic (CMSO) formula and t be an integer. For a given graph G, the task is to maximize |X| subject to the following: there is a set of vertices F of G, containing X, such that the subgraph G[F] induced by F is of treewidth at most t, and structure (G[F],X) models \phi. Some special cases of this optimization problem are the following generic examples. Each of these cases contains various problems as a special subcase: 1) "Maximum induced subgraph with at most l copies of cycles of length 0 modulo m", where for fixed nonnegative integers m and l, the task is to find a maximum induced subgraph of a given graph with at most l vertex-disjoint cycles of length 0 modulo m. 2) "Minimum \Gamma-deletion", where for a fixed finite set of graphs \Gamma\ containing a planar graph, the task is to find a maximum induced subgraph of a given graph containing no graph from \Gamma\ as a minor. 3) "Independent \Pi-packing", where for a fixed finite set of connected graphs \Pi, the task is to find an induced subgraph G[F] of a given graph G with the maximum number of connected components, such that each connected component of G[F] is isomorphic to some graph from \Pi. We give an algorithm solving the optimization problem on an n-vertex graph G in time O(#pmc n^{t+4} f(t,\phi)), where #pmc is the number of all potential maximal cliques in G and f is a function depending of t and \phi\ only. We also show how a similar running time can be obtained for the weighted version of the problem. Pipelined with known bounds on the number of potential maximal cliques, we deduce that our optimization problem can be solved in time O(1.7347^n) for arbitrary graphs, and in polynomial time for graph classes with polynomial number of minimal separators

Model Checking CTL is Almost Always Inherently Sequential

The model checking problem for CTL is known to be P-complete (Clarke, Emerson, and Sistla (1986), see Schnoebelen (2002)). We consider fragments of CTL obtained by restricting the use of temporal modalities or the use of negations—restrictions already studied for LTL by Sistla and Clarke (1985) and Markey (2004). For all these fragments, except for the trivial case without any temporal operator, we systematically prove model checking to be either inherently sequential (P-complete) or very efficiently parallelizable (LOGCFL-complete). For most fragments, however, model checking for CTL is already P-complete. Hence our results indicate that in most applications, approaching CTL model checking by parallelism will not result in the desired speed up. We also completely determine the complexity of the model checking problem for all fragments of the extensions ECTL, CTL +, and ECTL +

A linear programming based heuristic framework for min-max regret combinatorial optimization problems with interval costs

This work deals with a class of problems under interval data uncertainty, namely interval robust-hard problems, composed of interval data min-max regret generalizations of classical NP-hard combinatorial problems modeled as 0-1 integer linear programming problems. These problems are more challenging than other interval data min-max regret problems, as solely computing the cost of any feasible solution requires solving an instance of an NP-hard problem. The state-of-the-art exact algorithms in the literature are based on the generation of a possibly exponential number of cuts. As each cut separation involves the resolution of an NP-hard classical optimization problem, the size of the instances that can be solved efficiently is relatively small. To smooth this issue, we present a modeling technique for interval robust-hard problems in the context of a heuristic framework. The heuristic obtains feasible solutions by exploring dual information of a linearly relaxed model associated with the classical optimization problem counterpart. Computational experiments for interval data min-max regret versions of the restricted shortest path problem and the set covering problem show that our heuristic is able to find optimal or near-optimal solutions and also improves the primal bounds obtained by a state-of-the-art exact algorithm and a 2-approximation procedure for interval data min-max regret problems