A Framework for the Flexible Integration of a Class of Decision Procedures into Theorem Provers

The role of decision procedures is often essential in theorem proving. Decision procedures can reduce the search space of heuristic components of a prover and increase its abilities. However, in some applications only a small number of conjectures fall within the scope of the available decision procedures. Some of these conjectures could in an informal sense fall ‘just outside’ that scope. In these situations a problem arises because lemmas have to be invoked or the decision procedure has to communicate with the heuristic component of a theorem prover. This problem is also related to the general problem of how to exibly integrate decision procedures into heuristic theorem provers. In this paper we address such problems and describe a framework for the exible integration of decision procedures into other proof methods. The proposed framework can be used in different theorem provers, for different theories and for different decision procedures. New decision procedures can be simply ‘plugged-in’ to the system. As an illustration, we describe an instantiation of this framework within the Clam proof-planning system, to which it is well suited. We report on some results using this implementation

Applying machine learning to the problem of choosing a heuristic to select the variable ordering for cylindrical algebraic decomposition

Cylindrical algebraic decomposition(CAD) is a key tool in computational algebraic geometry, particularly for quantifier elimination over real-closed fields. When using CAD, there is often a choice for the ordering placed on the variables. This can be important, with some problems infeasible with one variable ordering but easy with another. Machine learning is the process of fitting a computer model to a complex function based on properties learned from measured data. In this paper we use machine learning (specifically a support vector machine) to select between heuristics for choosing a variable ordering, outperforming each of the separate heuristics.Comment: 16 page

Strict General Setting for Building Decision Procedures into Theorem Provers

The efficient and flexible incorporating of decision procedures into theorem provers is very important for their successful use. There are several approaches for combining and augmenting of decision procedures; some of them support handling uninterpreted functions, congruence closure, lemma invoking etc. In this paper we present a variant of one general setting for building decision procedures into theorem provers (gs framework [18]). That setting is based on macro inference rules motivated by techniques used in different approaches. The general setting enables a simple describing of different combination/augmentation schemes. In this paper, we further develop and extend this setting by an imposed ordering on the macro inference rules. That ordering leads to a ”strict setting”. It makes implementing and using variants of well-known or new schemes within this framework a very easy task even for a non-expert user. Also, this setting enables easy comparison of different combination/augmentation schemes and combination of their ideas

Combining decision procedures for the reals

We address the general problem of determining the validity of boolean combinations of equalities and inequalities between real-valued expressions. In particular, we consider methods of establishing such assertions using only restricted forms of distributivity. At the same time, we explore ways in which "local" decision or heuristic procedures for fragments of the theory of the reals can be amalgamated into global ones. Let Tadd[Q] be the first-order theory of the real numbers in the language of ordered groups, with negation, a constant 1, and function symbols for multiplication by rational constants. Let Tmult[Q] be the analogous theory for the multiplicative structure, and let T[Q] be the union of the two. We show that although T[Q] is undecidable, the universal fragment of T[Q] is decidable. We also show that terms of T[Q]can fruitfully be put in a normal form. We prove analogous results for theories in which Q is replaced, more generally, by suitable subfields F of the reals. Finally, we consider practical methods of establishing quantifier-free validities that approximate our (impractical) decidability results.Comment: Will appear in Logical Methods in Computer Scienc

A formally verified proof of the prime number theorem

The prime number theorem, established by Hadamard and de la Vall'ee Poussin independently in 1896, asserts that the density of primes in the positive integers is asymptotic to 1 / ln x. Whereas their proofs made serious use of the methods of complex analysis, elementary proofs were provided by Selberg and Erd"os in 1948. We describe a formally verified version of Selberg's proof, obtained using the Isabelle proof assistant.Comment: 23 page