Extending ACL2 with SMT Solvers

We present our extension of ACL2 with Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solvers using ACL2's trusted clause processor mechanism. We are particularly interested in the verification of physical systems including Analog and Mixed-Signal (AMS) designs. ACL2 offers strong induction abilities for reasoning about sequences and SMT complements deduction methods like ACL2 with fast nonlinear arithmetic solving procedures. While SAT solvers have been integrated into ACL2 in previous work, SMT methods raise new issues because of their support for a broader range of domains including real numbers and uninterpreted functions. This paper presents Smtlink, our clause processor for integrating SMT solvers into ACL2. We describe key design and implementation issues and describe our experience with its use.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2015, arXiv:1509.0552

Integrating Testing and Interactive Theorem Proving

Using an interactive theorem prover to reason about programs involves a sequence of interactions where the user challenges the theorem prover with conjectures. Invariably, many of the conjectures posed are in fact false, and users often spend considerable effort examining the theorem prover's output before realizing this. We present a synergistic integration of testing with theorem proving, implemented in the ACL2 Sedan (ACL2s), for automatically generating concrete counterexamples. Our method uses the full power of the theorem prover and associated libraries to simplify conjectures; this simplification can transform conjectures for which finding counterexamples is hard into conjectures where finding counterexamples is trivial. In fact, our approach even leads to better theorem proving, e.g. if testing shows that a generalization step leads to a false conjecture, we force the theorem prover to backtrack, allowing it to pursue more fruitful options that may yield a proof. The focus of the paper is on the engineering of a synergistic integration of testing with interactive theorem proving; this includes extending ACL2 with new functionality that we expect to be of general interest. We also discuss our experience in using ACL2s to teach freshman students how to reason about their programs.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2011, arXiv:1110.447

Deep Learning Recommendations for the ACL2 Interactive Theorem Prover

Due to the difficulty of obtaining formal proofs, there is increasing interest in partially or completely automating proof search in interactive theorem provers. Despite being a theorem prover with an active community and plentiful corpus of 170,000+ theorems, no deep learning system currently exists to help automate theorem proving in ACL2. We have developed a machine learning system that generates recommendations to automatically complete proofs. We show that our system benefits from the copy mechanism introduced in the context of program repair. We make our system directly accessible from within ACL2 and use this interface to evaluate our system in a realistic theorem proving environment

Proving Calculational Proofs Correct

Teaching proofs is a crucial component of any undergraduate-level program that covers formal reasoning. We have developed a calculational reasoning format and refined it over several years of teaching a freshman-level course, "Logic and Computation", to thousands of undergraduate students. In our companion paper, we presented our calculational proof format, gave an overview of the calculational proof checker (CPC) tool that we developed to help users write and validate proofs, described some of the technical and implementation details of CPC and provided several publicly available proofs written using our format. In this paper, we dive deeper into the implementation details of CPC, highlighting how proof validation works, which helps us argue that our proof checking process is sound.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2-2023, arXiv:2311.0837

From Verified Models to Verifiable Code

Declarative specifications of digital systems often contain parts that can be automatically translated into executable code. Automated code generation may reduce or eliminate the kinds of errors typically introduced through manual code writing. For this approach to be effective, the generated code should be reasonably efficient and, more importantly, verifiable. This paper presents a prototype code generator for the Prototype Verification System (PVS) that translates a subset of PVS functional specifications into an intermediate language and subsequently to multiple target programming languages. Several case studies are presented to illustrate the tool's functionality. The generated code can be analyzed by software verification tools such as verification condition generators, static analyzers, and software model-checkers to increase the confidence that the generated code is correct

Formal proofs about rewriting using ACL2

We present an application of the ACL2 theorem prover to reason about rewrite systems theory. We describe the formalization and representation aspects of our work using the firstorder, quantifier-free logic of ACL2 and we sketch some of the main points of the proof effort. First, we present a formalization of abstract reduction systems and then we show how this abstraction can be instantiated to establish results about term rewriting. The main theorems we mechanically proved are Newman’s lemma (for abstract reductions) and Knuth–Bendix critical pair theorem (for term rewriting).Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia TIC2000-1368-CO3-0