Satisfiability Modulo Free Data Structures Combined with Bridging Functions

International audienceFree Data Structures are finite semantic trees modulo equational axioms that are useful to represent classical data structures such as lists, multisets and sets. We study the satisfiability problem when free data structures are combined with bridging functions. We discuss the possibility to get a combination methodàmethod`methodà la Nelson-Oppen for these particular non-disjoint unions of theories. In order to handle satisfiability problems with disequalities, we investigate a form of sufficient surjectivity for the bridging functions

Ordered Sets in the Calculus of Data Structures

Our goal is to identify families of relations that are useful for reasoning about software. We describe such families using decidable quantifier-free classes of logical constraints with a rich set of operations. A key challenge is to define such classes of constraints in a modular way, by combining multiple decidable classes. Working with quantifierfree combinations of constraints makes the combination agenda more realistic and the resulting logics more likely to be tractable than in the presence of quantifiers. Our approach to combination is based on reducing decidable fragments to a common class, Boolean Algebra with Presburger Arithmetic (BAPA). This logic was introduced by Feferman and Vaught in 1959 and can express properties of uninterpreted sets of elements, with set algebra operations and equicardinality relation (consequently, it can also express Presburger arithmetic constraints on cardinalities of sets). Combination by reduction to BAPA allows us to obtain decidable quantifierfree combinations of decidable logics that share BAPA operations. We use the term Calculus of Data Structures to denote a family of decidable constraints that reduce to BAPA. This class includes, for example, combinations of formulas in BAPA, weak monadic second-order logic of k-successors, two-variable logic with counting, and term algebras with certain homomorphisms. The approach of reduction to BAPA generalizes the Nelson-Oppen combination that forms the foundation of constraint solvers used in software verification. BAPA is convenient as a target for reductions because it admits quantifier elimination and its quantifier-free fragment is NP-complete. We describe a new member of the Calculus of Data Structures: a quantifier-free fragment that supports 1) boolean algebra of finite and infinite sets of real numbers, 2) linear arithmetic over real numbers, 3) formulas that can restrict chosen set or element variables to range over integers (providing, among others, the power of mixed integer arithmetic and sets of integers), 4) the cardinality operators, stating whether a given set has a given finite cardinality or is infinite, 5) infimum and supremum operators on sets. Among the applications of this logic are reasoning about the externally observable behavior of data structures such as sorted lists and priority queues, and specifying witness functions for the BAPA synthesis problem. We describe an abstract reduction to BAPA for our logic, proving that the satisfiability of the logic is in NP and that it can be combined with the other fragments of the Calculus of Data Structures

Politeness for the Theory of Algebraic Datatypes (Extended Abstract)

peer reviewe

Nelson Oppen combination as a rewrite theory

Solving Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) problems in a key piece in automating tedious mathematical proofs. It involves deciding satisfiability of formulas of a decidable theory, which can often be reduced to solving systems of equalities and disequalities, in a variety of theories such as linear and non-linear real and integer arithmetic, arrays, uninterpreted and Boolean algebra. While solvers exist for many such theories or their subsets, it is common for interesting SMT problems to span multiple theories. SMT solvers typically use refinements of the Nelson-Oppen combination method, an algorithm for producing a solver for the quantifier free fragment of the combination of a number of such theories via cooperation between solvers of those theories, for this case. Here, we present the Nelson-Oppen algorithm adapted for an order-sorted setting as a rewriting logic theory. We implement this algorithm in the Maude System and instantiate it with the theories of real and integer matrices to demonstrate its use in automated theorem proving, and with hereditarily finite sets with reals to show its use with non-convex theories. This is done using both SMT solvers written in Maude itself via reflection (Variant-based satisfiability) and using external solvers (CVC4 and Yices). This work can be considered a first step towards building a rich ecosystem of cooperating SMT solvers in Maude, that modeling and automated theorem proving tools typically written using the Maude System can leverage

Delayed theory combination vs. Nelson-Oppen for satisfiability modulo theories: a comparative analysis

Most state-of-the-art approaches for Satisfiability Modulo Theories $(SMT(\mathcal{T}))$ rely on the integration between a SAT solver and a decision procedure for sets of literals in the background theory $\mathcal{T} (\mathcal{T}{\text {-}}solver)$ . Often $\mathcal{T}$ is the combination $\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2$ of two (or more) simpler theories $(SMT(\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2))$ , s.t. the specific ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ must be combined. Up to a few years ago, the standard approach to $SMT(\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2)$ was to integrate the SAT solver with one combined $\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2{\text {-}}solver$ , obtained from two distinct ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ by means of evolutions of Nelson and Oppen's (NO) combination procedure, in which the ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ deduce and exchange interface equalities. Nowadays many state-of-the-art SMT solvers use evolutions of a more recent $SMT(\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2)$ procedure called Delayed Theory Combination (DTC), in which each ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solver$ interacts directly and only with the SAT solver, in such a way that part or all of the (possibly very expensive) reasoning effort on interface equalities is delegated to the SAT solver itself. In this paper we present a comparative analysis of DTC vs. NO for $SMT(\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_2)$ . On the one hand, we explain the advantages of DTC in exploiting the power of modern SAT solvers to reduce the search. On the other hand, we show that the extra amount of Boolean search required to the SAT solver can be controlled. In fact, we prove two novel theoretical results, for both convex and non-convex theories and for different deduction capabilities of the ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ , which relate the amount of extra Boolean search required to the SAT solver by DTC with the number of deductions and case-splits required to the ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ by NO in order to perform the same tasks: (i) under the same hypotheses of deduction capabilities of the ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ required by NO, DTC causes no extra Boolean search; (ii) using ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers$ with limited or no deduction capabilities, the extra Boolean search required can be reduced down to a negligible amount by controlling the quality of the $\mathcal{T}$ -conflict sets returned by the ${\mathcal{T}_i}{\text {-}}solvers

New results on rewrite-based satisfiability procedures

Program analysis and verification require decision procedures to reason on theories of data structures. Many problems can be reduced to the satisfiability of sets of ground literals in theory T. If a sound and complete inference system for first-order logic is guaranteed to terminate on T-satisfiability problems, any theorem-proving strategy with that system and a fair search plan is a T-satisfiability procedure. We prove termination of a rewrite-based first-order engine on the theories of records, integer offsets, integer offsets modulo and lists. We give a modularity theorem stating sufficient conditions for termination on a combinations of theories, given termination on each. The above theories, as well as others, satisfy these conditions. We introduce several sets of benchmarks on these theories and their combinations, including both parametric synthetic benchmarks to test scalability, and real-world problems to test performances on huge sets of literals. We compare the rewrite-based theorem prover E with the validity checkers CVC and CVC Lite. Contrary to the folklore that a general-purpose prover cannot compete with reasoners with built-in theories, the experiments are overall favorable to the theorem prover, showing that not only the rewriting approach is elegant and conceptually simple, but has important practical implications.Comment: To appear in the ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 49 page

Automated Deduction – CADE 28

This open access book constitutes the proceeding of the 28th International Conference on Automated Deduction, CADE 28, held virtually in July 2021. The 29 full papers and 7 system descriptions presented together with 2 invited papers were carefully reviewed and selected from 76 submissions. CADE is the major forum for the presentation of research in all aspects of automated deduction, including foundations, applications, implementations, and practical experience. The papers are organized in the following topics: Logical foundations; theory and principles; implementation and application; ATP and AI; and system descriptions

Decidable fragments of first-order logic and of first-order linear arithmetic with uninterpreted predicates

First-order logic is one of the most prominent formalisms in computer science and mathematics. Since there is no algorithm capable of solving its satisfiability problem, first-order logic is said to be undecidable. The classical decision problem is the quest for a delineation between the decidable and the undecidable parts. The results presented in this thesis shed more light on the boundary and open new perspectives on the landscape of known decidable fragments. In the first part we focus on the new concept of separateness of variables and explore its applicability to the classical decision problem and beyond. Two disjoint sets of first-order variables are separated in a given formula if none of its atoms contains variables from both sets. This notion facilitates the definition of decidable extensions of many well-known decidable first-order fragments. We demonstrate this for several prefix fragments, several guarded fragments, the two-variable fragment, and for the fluted fragment. Although the extensions exhibit the same expressive power as the respective originals, certain logical properties can be expressed much more succinctly. In two cases the succinctness gap cannot be bounded using elementary functions. This fact already hints at computationally hard satisfiability problems. Indeed, we derive non-elementary lower bounds for the separated fragment, an extension of the Bernays-Schönfinkel-Ramsey fragment (E*A*-prefix sentences). On the semantic level, separateness of quantified variables may lead to weaker dependences than we encounter in general. We investigate this property in the context of model-checking games. The focus of the second part of the thesis is on linear arithmetic with uninterpreted predicates. Two novel decidable fragments are presented, both based on the Bernays-Schönfinkel-Ramsey fragment. On the negative side, we identify several small fragments of the language for which satisfiability is undecidable.Untersuchungen der Logik erster Stufe blicken auf eine lange Tradition zurück. Es ist allgemein bekannt, dass das zugehörige Erfüllbarkeitsproblem im Allgemeinen nicht algorithmisch gelöst werden kann - man spricht daher von einer unentscheidbaren Logik. Diese Beobachtung wirft ein Schlaglicht auf die prinzipiellen Grenzen der Fähigkeiten von Computern im Allgemeinen aber auch des automatischen Schließens im Besonderen. Das Hilbertsche Entscheidungsproblem wird heute als die Erforschung der Grenze zwischen entscheidbaren und unentscheidbaren Teilen der Logik erster Stufe verstanden, wobei die untersuchten Fragmente der Logik mithilfe klar zu erfassender und berechenbarer syntaktischer Eigenschaften beschrieben werden. Viele Forscher haben bereits zu dieser Untersuchung beigetragen und zahlreiche entscheidbare und unentscheidbare Fragmente entdeckt und erforscht. Die vorliegende Dissertation setzt diese Tradition mit einer Reihe vornehmlich positiver Resultate fort und eröffnet neue Blickwinkel auf eine Reihe von Fragmenten, die im Laufe der letzten einhundert Jahre untersucht wurden. Im ersten Teil der Arbeit steht das syntaktische Konzept der Separiertheit von Variablen im Mittelpunkt, und dessen Anwendbarkeit auf das Entscheidungsproblem und darüber hinaus wird erforscht. Zwei Mengen von Individuenvariablen gelten bezüglich einer gegebenen Formel als separiert, falls in jedem Atom der Formel die Variablen aus höchstens einer der beiden Mengen vorkommen. Mithilfe dieses leicht verständlichen Begriffs lassen sich viele wohlbekannte entscheidbare Fragmente der Logik erster Stufe zu größeren Klassen von Formeln erweitern, die dennoch entscheidbar sind. Dieser Ansatz wird für neun Fragmente im Detail dargelegt, darunter mehrere Präfix-Fragmente, das Zwei-Variablen-Fragment und sogenannte "guarded" und " uted" Fragmente. Dabei stellt sich heraus, dass alle erweiterten Fragmente ebenfalls das monadische Fragment erster Stufe ohne Gleichheit enthalten. Obwohl die erweiterte Syntax in den betrachteten Fällen nicht mit einer erhöhten Ausdrucksstärke einhergeht, können bestimmte Zusammenhänge mithilfe der erweiterten Syntax deutlich kürzer formuliert werden. Zumindest in zwei Fällen ist diese Diskrepanz nicht durch eine elementare Funktion zu beschränken. Dies liefert einen ersten Hinweis darauf, dass die algorithmische Lösung des Erfüllbarkeitsproblems für die erweiterten Fragmente mit sehr hohem Rechenaufwand verbunden ist. Tatsächlich wird eine nicht-elementare untere Schranke für den entsprechenden Zeitbedarf beim sogenannten separierten Fragment, einer Erweiterung des bekannten Bernays-Schönfinkel-Ramsey-Fragments, abgeleitet. Darüber hinaus wird der Ein uss der Separiertheit von Individuenvariablen auf der semantischen Ebene untersucht, wo Abhängigkeiten zwischen quantifizierten Variablen durch deren Separiertheit stark abgeschwächt werden können. Für die genauere formale Betrachtung solcher als schwach bezeichneten Abhängigkeiten wird auf sogenannte Hintikka-Spiele zurückgegriffen. Den Schwerpunkt des zweiten Teils der vorliegenden Arbeit bildet das Entscheidungsproblem für die lineare Arithmetik über den rationalen Zahlen in Verbindung mit uninterpretierten Prädikaten. Es werden zwei bislang unbekannte entscheidbare Fragmente dieser Sprache vorgestellt, die beide auf dem Bernays-Schönfinkel-Ramsey-Fragment aufbauen. Ferner werden neue negative Resultate entwickelt und mehrere unentscheidbare Fragmente vorgestellt, die lediglich einen sehr eingeschränkten Teil der Sprache benötigen