CoLoR: a Coq library on well-founded rewrite relations and its application to the automated verification of termination certificates

Termination is an important property of programs; notably required for programs formulated in proof assistants. It is a very active subject of research in the Turing-complete formalism of term rewriting systems, where many methods and tools have been developed over the years to address this problem. Ensuring reliability of those tools is therefore an important issue. In this paper we present a library formalizing important results of the theory of well-founded (rewrite) relations in the proof assistant Coq. We also present its application to the automated verification of termination certificates, as produced by termination tools

Argument filterings and usable rules in higher-order rewrite systems

The static dependency pair method is a method for proving the termination of higher-order rewrite systems a la Nipkow. It combines the dependency pair method introduced for first-order rewrite systems with the notion of strong computability introduced for typed lambda-calculi. Argument filterings and usable rules are two important methods of the dependency pair framework used by current state-of-the-art first-order automated termination provers. In this paper, we extend the class of higher-order systems on which the static dependency pair method can be applied. Then, we extend argument filterings and usable rules to higher-order rewriting, hence providing the basis for a powerful automated termination prover for higher-order rewrite systems

AC Dependency Pairs Revisited

Rewriting modulo AC, i.e., associativity and/or commutativity of certain symbols, is among the most frequently used extensions of term rewriting by equational theories. In this paper we present a generalization of the dependency pair framework for termination analysis to rewriting modulo AC. It subsumes existing variants of AC dependency pairs, admits standard dependency graph analyses, and in particular enjoys the minimality property in the standard sense. As a direct benefit, important termination techniques are easily extended; we describe usable rules and the subterm criterion for AC termination, which properly generalize the non-AC versions. We also perform these extensions within IsaFoR - the Isabelle formalization of rewriting - and thereby provide the first formalization of AC dependency pairs. Consequently, our certifier CeTA now supports checking proofs of AC termination

Certification of Confluence Proofs using CeTA

CeTA was originally developed as a tool for certifying termination proofs which have to be provided as certificates in the CPF-format. Its soundness is proven as part of IsaFoR, the Isabelle Formalization of Rewriting. By now, CeTA can also be used for certifying confluence and non-confluence proofs. In this system description, we give a short overview on what kind of proofs are supported, and what information has to be given in the certificates. As we will see, only a small amount of information is required and so we hope that CSI will not stay the only confluence tool which can produce certificates.Comment: 5 pages, International Workshop on Confluence 201

Certification of Complexity Proofs using CeTA

Nowadays certification is widely employed by automated termination tools for term rewriting, where certifiers support most available techniques. In complexity analysis, the situation is quite different. Although tools support certification in principle, current certifiers implement only the most basic technique, namely, suitably tamed versions of reduction orders. As a consequence, only a small fraction of the proofs generated by state-of-the-art complexity tools can be certified. To improve upon this situation, we formalized a framework for the certification of modular complexity proofs and incorporated it into CeTA. We report on this extension and present the newly supported techniques (match-bounds, weak dependency pairs, dependency tuples, usable rules, and usable replacement maps), resulting in a significant increase in the number of certifiable complexity proofs. During our work we detected conflicts in theoretical results as well as bugs in existing complexity tools

Certification of Confluence Proofs using CeTA

5 pages, International Workshop on Confluence 20145 pages, International Workshop on Confluence 2014CeTA was originally developed as a tool for certifying termination proofs which have to be provided as certificates in the CPF-format. Its soundness is proven as part of IsaFoR, the Isabelle Formalization of Rewriting. By now, CeTA can also be used for certifying confluence and non-confluence proofs. In this system description, we give a short overview on what kind of proofs are supported, and what information has to be given in the certificates. As we will see, only a small amount of information is required and so we hope that CSI will not stay the only confluence tool which can produce certificates

Certification of Complexity Proofs using CeTA

International audienceNowadays certification is widely employed by automated termination tools for term rewriting, where certifiers support most available techniques. In complexity analysis, the situation is quite different. Although tools support certification in principle, current certifiers implement only the most basic technique, namely, suitably tamed versions of reduction orders. As a consequence, only a small fraction of the proofs generated by state-of-the-art complexity tools can be certified. To improve upon this situation, we formalized a framework for the certification of modular complexity proofs and incorporated it into CeTA. We report on this extension and present the newly supported techniques (match-bounds, weak dependency pairs, dependency tuples, usable rules, and usable replacement maps), resulting in a significant increase in the number of certifiable complexity proofs. During our work we detected conflicts in theoretical results as well as bugs in existing complexity tools

Improving Automatic Confluence Analysis of Rewrite Systems by Redundant Rules

We describe how to utilize redundant rewrite rules, i.e., rules that can be simulated by other rules, when (dis)proving confluence of term rewrite systems. We demonstrate how automatic confluence provers benefit from the addition as well as the removal of redundant rules. Due to their simplicity, our transformations were easy to formalize in a proof assistant and are thus amenable to certification. Experimental results show the surprising gain in power

Improving automatic confluence analysis of rewrite systems by redundant rules

We describe how to utilize redundant rewrite rules, i.e., rules that can be simulated by other rules, when (dis)proving confluence of term rewrite systems. We demonstrate how automatic confluence provers benefit from the addition as well as the removal of redundant rules. Due to their simplicity, our transformations were easy to formalize in a proof assistant and are thus amenable to certification. Experimental results show the surprising gain in power