978 research outputs found

    Automatically Proving and Disproving Feasibility Conditions

    Full text link
    [EN] In the realm of term rewriting, given terms s and t, a reachability condition s>>t is called feasible if there is a substitution O such that O(s) rewrites into O(t) in zero or more steps; otherwise, it is called infeasible. Checking infeasibility of (sequences of) reachability conditions is important in the analysis of computational properties of rewrite systems like confluence or (operational) termination. In this paper, we generalize this notion of feasibility to arbitrary n-ary relations on terms defined by first-order theories. In this way, properties of computational systems whose operational semantics can be given as a first-order theory can be investigated. We introduce a framework for proving feasibility/infeasibility, and a new tool, infChecker, which implements it.Supported by EU (FEDER), and projects RTI2018-094403-B-C32, PROMETEO/2019/098, and SP20180225. Also by INCIBE program "Ayudas para la excelencia de los equipos de investigación avanzada en ciberseguridad" (Raul Gutiérrez).Gutiérrez Gil, R.; Lucas Alba, S. (2020). Automatically Proving and Disproving Feasibility Conditions. Springer Nature. 416-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51054-1_27S416435Andrianarivelo, N., Réty, P.: Over-approximating terms reachable by context-sensitive rewriting. In: Bojańczyk, M., Lasota, S., Potapov, I. (eds.) RP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9328, pp. 128–139. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24537-9_12Dershowitz, N.: Termination of rewriting. J. Symb. Comput. 3(1/2), 69–116 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-7171(87)80022-6Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Mechanizing and improving dependency pairs. J. Autom. Reasoning 37(3), 155–203 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-006-9057-7Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Models and equality for logical programming. In: Ehrig, H., Kowalski, R., Levi, G., Montanari, U. (eds.) TAPSOFT 1987. LNCS, vol. 250, pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0014969Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Automatic generation of logical models with AGES. In: Fontaine, P. (ed.) CADE 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11716, pp. 287–299. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29436-6_17Kojima, Y., Sakai, M.: Innermost reachability and context sensitive reachability properties are decidable for linear right-shallow term rewriting systems. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) RTA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5117, pp. 187–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70590-1_13Kojima, Y., Sakai, M., Nishida, N., Kusakari, K., Sakabe, T.: Context-sensitive innermost reachability is decidable for linear right-shallow term rewriting systems. Inf. Media Technol. 4(4), 802–814 (2009)Kojima, Y., Sakai, M., Nishida, N., Kusakari, K., Sakabe, T.: Decidability of reachability for right-shallow context-sensitive term rewriting systems. IPSJ Online Trans. 4, 192–216 (2011)Lucas, S.: Analysis of rewriting-based systems as first-order theories. In: Fioravanti, F., Gallagher, J.P. (eds.) LOPSTR 2017. LNCS, vol. 10855, pp. 180–197. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94460-9_11Lucas, S.: Context-sensitive computations in functional and functional logic programs. J. Funct. Logic Program. 1998(1) (1998). http://danae.uni-muenster.de/lehre/kuchen/JFLP/articles/1998/A98-01/A98-01.htmlLucas, S.: Proving semantic properties as first-order satisfiability. Artif. Intell. 277 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2019.103174Lucas, S.: Using well-founded relations for proving operational termination. J. Autom. Reasoning 64(2), 167–195 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-019-09514-2Lucas, S., Gutiérrez, R.: Use of logical models for proving infeasibility in term rewriting. Inf. Process. Lett. 136, 90–95 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2018.04.002Lucas, S., Marché, C., Meseguer, J.: Operational termination of conditional term rewriting systems. Inf. Process. Lett. 95(4), 446–453 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2005.05.002Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Proving operational termination of declarative programs in general logics. In: Chitil, O., King, A., Danvy, O. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom, 8–10 September 2014, pp. 111–122. ACM (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2643135.2643152Lucas, S., Meseguer, J., Gutiérrez, R.: The 2D dependency pair framework for conditional rewrite systems. Part I: definition and basic processors. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 96, 74–106 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2018.04.002Lucas, S., Meseguer, J., Gutiérrez, R.: The 2D dependency pair framework for conditional rewrite systems—Part II: advanced processors and implementation techniques. J. Autom. Reasoning (2020, in press)McCune, W.: Prover9 and Mace4. https://www.cs.unm.edu/~mccune/mace4/Meßner, F., Sternagel, C.: nonreach – a tool for nonreachability analysis. In: Vojnar, T., Zhang, L. (eds.) TACAS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11427, pp. 337–343. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17462-0_19Middeldorp, A., Nagele, J., Shintani, K.: Confluence competition 2019. In: Beyer, D., Huisman, M., Kordon, F., Steffen, B. (eds.) TACAS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11429, pp. 25–40. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17502-3_2Nishida, N., Maeda, Y.: Narrowing trees for syntactically deterministic conditional term rewriting systems. In: Kirchner, H. (ed.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction. FSCD 2018. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 108, pp. 26:1–26:20. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2018). https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2018.26Ohlebusch, E.: Advanced Topics in Term Rewriting. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). http://www.springer.com/computer/swe/book/978-0-387-95250-5Prawitz, D.: Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study. Dover, New York (2006)Sternagel, C., Sternagel, T., Middeldorp, A.: CoCo 2018 Participant: ConCon 1.5. In: Felgenhauer, B., Simonsen, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Confluence. IWC 2018, p. 66 (2018). http://cl-informatik.uibk.ac.at/events/iwc-2018/Sternagel, C., Yamada, A.: Reachability analysis for termination and confluence of rewriting. In: Vojnar, T., Zhang, L. (eds.) TACAS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11427, pp. 262–278. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17462-0_15Winkler, S., Moser, G.: MædMax: a maximal ordered completion tool. In: Galmiche, D., Schulz, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) IJCAR 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10900, pp. 472–480. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94205-6_3

    Proving Looping and Non-Looping Non-Termination by Finite Automata

    Get PDF
    A new technique is presented to prove non-termination of term rewriting. The basic idea is to find a non-empty regular language of terms that is closed under rewriting and does not contain normal forms. It is automated by representing the language by a tree automaton with a fixed number of states, and expressing the mentioned requirements in a SAT formula. Satisfiability of this formula implies non-termination. Our approach succeeds for many examples where all earlier techniques fail, for instance for the S-rule from combinatory logic

    Proving non-termination by finite automata

    Get PDF
    A new technique is presented to prove non-termination of term rewriting. The basic idea is to find a non-empty regular language of terms that is closed under rewriting and does not contain normal forms. It is automated by representing the language by a tree automaton with a fixed number of states, and expressing the mentioned requirements in a SAT formula. Satisfiability of this formula implies non-termination. Our approach succeeds for many examples where all earlier techniques fail, for instance for the S-rule from combinatory logic

    Proving Confluence in the Confluence Framework with CONFident

    Full text link
    This article describes the *Confluence Framework*, a novel framework for proving and disproving confluence using a divide-and-conquer modular strategy, and its implementation in CONFident. Using this approach, we are able to automatically prove and disprove confluence of *Generalized Term Rewriting Systems*, where (i) only selected arguments of function symbols can be rewritten and (ii) a rather general class of conditional rules can be used. This includes, as particular cases, several variants of rewrite systems such as (context-sensitive) *term rewriting systems*, *string rewriting systems*, and (context-sensitive) *conditional term rewriting systems*. The divide-and-conquer modular strategy allows us to combine in a proof tree different techniques for proving confluence, including modular decompositions, checking joinability of (conditional) critical and variable pairs, transformations, etc., and auxiliary tasks required by them, e.g., joinability of terms, joinability of conditional pairs, etc

    Confluence of Conditional Rewriting in Logic Form

    Get PDF
    We characterize conditional rewriting as satisfiability in a Herbrand-like model of terms where variables are also included as fresh constant symbols extending the original signature. Confluence of conditional rewriting and joinability of conditional critical pairs is characterized similarly. Joinability of critical pairs is then translated into combinations of (in)feasibility problems which can be efficiently handled by a number of automatic tools. This permits a more efficient use of standard results for proving confluence of conditional term rewriting systems, most of them relying on auxiliary proofs of joinability of conditional critical pairs, perhaps with additional syntactical and (operational) termination requirements on the system. Our approach has been implemented in a new system: CONFident . Its ability to (dis)prove confluence of conditional term rewriting systems is witnessed by means of some benchmarks comparing our tool with existing tools for similar purposes

    MU-TERM: Verify Termination Properties Automatically (System Description)

    Full text link
    [EN] We report on the new version of mu-term, a tool for proving termination properties of variants of rewrite systems, including conditional, context-sensitive, equational, and order-sorted rewrite systems. We follow a unified logic-based approach to describe rewriting computations. The automatic generation of logical models for suitable first-order theories and formulas provide a common basis to implement the proofs.Supported by EU (FEDER), and projects RTI2018-094403-B-C32,PROMETEO/ 2019/098, and SP20180225. Also by INCIBE program "Ayudas para la excelencia de los equipos de investigación avanzada en ciberseguridad" (Raul Gutiérrez).Gutiérrez Gil, R.; Lucas Alba, S. (2020). MU-TERM: Verify Termination Properties Automatically (System Description). Springer Nature. 436-447. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51054-1_28S436447Alarcón, B., et al.: Improving context-sensitive dependency pairs. In: Cervesato, I., Veith, H., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5330, pp. 636–651. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89439-1_44Alarcón, B., Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Context-sensitive dependency pairs. Inf. Comput. 208(8), 922–968 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2010.03.003Alarcón, B., Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S., Navarro-Marset, R.: Proving termination properties with mu-term. In: Johnson, M., Pavlovic, D. (eds.) AMAST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6486, pp. 201–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17796-5_12Alarcón, B., Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: A dependency pair framework for A∨C{A} \vee {C}-termination. In: Ölveczky, P.C. (ed.) WRLA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6381, pp. 35–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16310-4_4Arts, T., Giesl, J.: Termination of term rewriting using dependency pairs. Theor. Comput. Sci. 236(1–2), 133–178 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3975(99)00207-8Clavel, M., et al.: All About Maude - A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS, vol. 4350. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71999-1Endrullis, J., Waldmann, J., Zantema, H.: Matrix interpretations for proving termination of term rewriting. J. Autom. Reasoning 40(2–3), 195–220 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-007-9087-9Giesl, J., Arts, T.: Verification of erlang processes by dependency pairs. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 12(1/2), 39–72 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002000100063Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P.: Proving and disproving termination of higher-order functions. In: Gramlich, B. (ed.) FroCoS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3717, pp. 216–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11559306_12Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Mechanizing and improving dependency pairs. J. Autom. Reasoning 37(3), 155–203 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-006-9057-7Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted algebra I: equational deduction for multiple inheritance, overloading, exceptions and partial operations. Theor. Comput. Sci. 105(2), 217–273 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(92)90302-VGutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Function calls at frozen positions in termination of context-sensitive rewriting. In: Martí-Oliet, N., Ölveczky, P.C., Talcott, C. (eds.) Logic, Rewriting, and Concurrency. LNCS, vol. 9200, pp. 311–330. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23165-5_15Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Proving termination in the context-sensitive dependency pair framework. In: Ölveczky, P.C. (ed.) WRLA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6381, pp. 18–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16310-4_3Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Automatic generation of logical models with AGES. In: Fontaine, P. (ed.) CADE 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11716, pp. 287–299. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29436-6_17Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S.: Automatically proving and disproving feasibility conditions. In: Peltier, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) IJCAR 2020. LNAI, vol. 12167, pp. 416–435. Springer, Heidelberg (2020)Lucas, S.: Context-sensitive computations in functional and functional logic programs. J. Funct. Log. Program. 1998(1), 1–61 (1998). http://danae.uni-muenster.de/lehre/kuchen/JFLP/articles/1998/A98-01/A98-01.htmlLucas, S.: Context-sensitive rewriting strategies. Inf. Comput. 178(1), 294–343 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1006/inco.2002.3176Lucas, S.: Proving semantic properties as first-order satisfiability. Artif. Intell. 277 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2019.103174Lucas, S., Gutiérrez, R.: Automatic synthesis of logical models for order-sorted first-order theories. J. Autom. Reasoning 60(4), 465–501 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-017-9419-3Lucas, S., Gutiérrez, R.: Use of logical models for proving infeasibility in term rewriting. Inf. Process. Lett. 136, 90–95 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2018.04.002Lucas, S., Marché, C., Meseguer, J.: Operational termination of conditional term rewriting systems. Inf. Process. Lett. 95(4), 446–453 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2005.05.002Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted dependency pairs. In: Antoy, S., Albert, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, 15–17 July 2008, Valencia, Spain, pp. 108–119. ACM (2008). https://doi.org/10.1145/1389449.1389463Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Dependency pairs for proving termination properties of conditional term rewriting systems. J. Log. Algebraic Methods Program. 86(1), 236–268 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlamp.2016.03.003Lucas, S., Meseguer, J., Gutiérrez, R.: The 2D dependency pair framework for conditional rewrite systems. Part I: Definition and basic processors. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 96, 74–106 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2018.04.002Lucas, S., Meseguer, J., Gutiérrez, R.: The 2D dependency pair framework for conditional rewrite systems—part II: advanced processors and implementation techniques. J. Autom. Reasoning (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-020-09542-3McCune, W.: Prover9 & Mace4. Technical report (2005–2010). http://www.cs.unm.edu/~mccune/prover9/Ohlebusch, E.: Advanced Topics in Term Rewriting. Springer (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3661-8 . http://www.springer.com/computer/swe/book/978-0-387-95250-5Ölveczky, P.C., Lysne, O.: Order-sorted termination: the unsorted way. In: Hanus, M., Rodríguez-Artalejo, M. (eds.) ALP 1996. LNCS, vol. 1139, pp. 92–106. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61735-3_6Zantema, H.: Termination of term rewriting: interpretation and type elimination. J. Symb. Comput. 17(1), 23–50 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1006/jsco.1994.1003Zantema, H.: Termination of context-sensitive rewriting. In: Comon, H. (ed.) RTA 1997. LNCS, vol. 1232, pp. 172–186. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-62950-5_6

    05431 Abstracts Collection -- Deduction and Applications

    Get PDF
    From 23.10.05 to 28.10.05, the Dagstuhl Seminar 05431 ``Deduction and Applications\u27\u27 was held in the International Conference and Research Center (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

    infChecker. A Tool for Checking Infeasibility

    Full text link
    [EN] Given a Conditional Term Rewriting System (CTRS) R and terms s and t, we say that the reachability condition s ->* t is *feasible* if there is a substitution \sigma instantiating the variables in s and t such that the *reachability test* \sigma(s)->* \sigma(t) succeeds; otherwise, we call it *infeasible*. Checking infeasibility of such (sequences of) reachability conditions is important in the analysis of computational properties of CTRSs, like confluence or operational termination. Recently, a logic-based approach to prove and disprove infeasibility has been introduced. In this paper we present infChecker, a new tool for checking infeasibility which is based on such an approach.Partially supported by the EU (FEDER), and projects RTI2018-094403-B-C32, PROMETEO/2019/098, and SP20180225. Raul Gutierrez was also supported by INCIBE program Ayudas para la excelencia de los equipos de investigacion avanzada en ciberseguridad.Gutiérrez Gil, R.; Lucas Alba, S. (2019). infChecker. A Tool for Checking Infeasibility. Universidade de Brasilia. 38-42. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/181069S384

    Relational Symbolic Execution

    Full text link
    Symbolic execution is a classical program analysis technique used to show that programs satisfy or violate given specifications. In this work we generalize symbolic execution to support program analysis for relational specifications in the form of relational properties - these are properties about two runs of two programs on related inputs, or about two executions of a single program on related inputs. Relational properties are useful to formalize notions in security and privacy, and to reason about program optimizations. We design a relational symbolic execution engine, named RelSym which supports interactive refutation, as well as proving of relational properties for programs written in a language with arrays and for-like loops
    • …
    corecore