Disproving in First-Order Logic with Definitions, Arithmetic and Finite Domains

This thesis explores several methods which enable a first-order reasoner to conclude satisfiability of a formula modulo an arithmetic theory. The most general method requires restricting certain quantifiers to range over finite sets; such assumptions are common in the software verification setting. In addition, the use of first-order reasoning allows for an implicit representation of those finite sets, which can avoid scalability problems that affect other quantified reasoning methods. These new techniques form a useful complement to existing methods that are primarily aimed at proving validity. The Superposition calculus for hierarchic theory combinations provides a basis for reasoning modulo theories in a first-order setting. The recent account of ‘weak abstraction’ and related improvements make an mplementation of the calculus practical. Also, for several logical theories of interest Superposition is an effective decision procedure for the quantifier free fragment. The first contribution is an implementation of that calculus (Beagle), including an optimized implementation of Cooper’s algorithm for quantifier elimination in the theory of linear integer arithmetic. This includes a novel means of extracting values for quantified variables in satisfiable integer problems. Beagle won an efficiency award at CADE Automated theorem prover System Competition (CASC)-J7, and won the arithmetic non-theorem category at CASC-25. This implementation is the start point for solving the ‘disproving with theories’ problem. Some hypotheses can be disproved by showing that, together with axioms the hypothesis is unsatisfiable. Often this is relative to other axioms that enrich a base theory by defining new functions. In that case, the disproof is contingent on the satisfiability of the enrichment. Satisfiability in this context is undecidable. Instead, general characterizations of definition formulas, which do not alter the satisfiability status of the main axioms, are given. These general criteria apply to recursive definitions, definitions over lists, and to arrays. This allows proving some non-theorems which are otherwise intractable, and justifies similar disproofs of non-linear arithmetic formulas. When the hypothesis is contingently true, disproof requires proving existence of a model. If the Superposition calculus saturates a clause set, then a model exists, but only when the clause set satisfies a completeness criterion. This requires each instance of an uninterpreted, theory-sorted term to have a definition in terms of theory symbols. The second contribution is a procedure that creates such definitions, given that a subset of quantifiers range over finite sets. Definitions are produced in a counter-example driven way via a sequence of over and under approximations to the clause set. Two descriptions of the method are given: the first uses the component solver modularly, but has an inefficient counter-example heuristic. The second is more general, correcting many of the inefficiencies of the first, yet it requires tracking clauses through a proof. This latter method is shown to apply also to lists and to problems with unbounded quantifiers. Together, these tools give new ways for applying successful first-order reasoning methods to problems involving interpreted theories

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

Certifying Correctness for Combinatorial Algorithms : by Using Pseudo-Boolean Reasoning

Over the last decades, dramatic improvements in combinatorialoptimisation algorithms have significantly impacted artificialintelligence, operations research, and other areas. These advances,however, are achieved through highly sophisticated algorithms that aredifficult to verify and prone to implementation errors that can causeincorrect results. A promising approach to detect wrong results is touse certifying algorithms that produce not only the desired output butalso a certificate or proof of correctness of the output. An externaltool can then verify the proof to determine that the given answer isvalid. In the Boolean satisfiability (SAT) community, this concept iswell established in the form of proof logging, which has become thestandard solution for generating trustworthy outputs. The problem isthat there are still some SAT solving techniques for which prooflogging is challenging and not yet used in practice. Additionally,there are many formalisms more expressive than SAT, such as constraintprogramming, various graph problems and maximum satisfiability(MaxSAT), for which efficient proof logging is out of reach forstate-of-the-art techniques.This work develops a new proof system building on the cutting planesproof system and operating on pseudo-Boolean constraints (0-1 linearinequalities). We explain how such machine-verifiable proofs can becreated for various problems, including parity reasoning, symmetry anddominance breaking, constraint programming, subgraph isomorphism andmaximum common subgraph problems, and pseudo-Boolean problems. Weimplement and evaluate the resulting algorithms and a verifier for theproof format, demonstrating that the approach is practical for a widerange of problems. We are optimistic that the proposed proof system issuitable for designing certifying variants of algorithms inpseudo-Boolean optimisation, MaxSAT and beyond

Automated Reasoning

This volume, LNAI 13385, constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, IJCAR 2022, held in Haifa, Israel, in August 2022. The 32 full research papers and 9 short papers presented together with two invited talks were carefully reviewed and selected from 85 submissions. The papers focus on the following topics: Satisfiability, SMT Solving,Arithmetic; Calculi and Orderings; Knowledge Representation and Jutsification; Choices, Invariance, Substitutions and Formalization; Modal Logics; Proofs System and Proofs Search; Evolution, Termination and Decision Prolems. This is an open access book

Automated Theorem Proving with Extensions of First-Order Logic

Automated theorem provers are computer programs that check whether a logical conjecture follows from a set of logical statements. The conjecture and the statements are expressed in the language of some formal logic, such as first-order logic. Theorem provers for first-order logic have been used for automation in proof assistants, verification of programs, static analysis of networks, and other purposes. However, the efficient usage of these provers remains challenging. One of the challenges is the complexity of translating domain problems to first-order logic. Not only can such translation be cumbersome due to semantic differences between the domain and the logic, but it might inadvertently result in problems that provers cannot easily handle.The work presented in the thesis addresses this challenge by developing an extension of first-order logic named FOOL. FOOL contains syntactical features of programming languages and more expressive logics, is friendly for translation of problems from various domains, and can be efficiently supported by existing theorem provers. We describe the syntax and semantics of FOOL and present a simple translation from FOOL to plain first-order logic. We describe an efficient clausal normal form transformation algorithm for FOOL and based on it implement a support for FOOL in the Vampire theorem prover. We illustrate the efficient use of FOOL for program verification by describing a concise encoding of next state relations of imperative programs in FOOL. We show a usage of features of FOOL in problems of static analysis of networks. We demonstrate the efficiency of automated theorem proving in FOOL with an extensive set of experiments. In these experiments we compare the performance of Vampire on a large collection of problems from various sources translated to FOOL and ordinary first-order logic. Finally, we fix the syntax for FOOL in TPTP, the standard language of first-order theorem provers

Logic Programming: Context, Character and Development

Logic programming has been attracting increasing interest in recent years. Its first realisation in the form of PROLOG demonstrated concretely that Kowalski's view of computation as controlled deduction could be implemented with tolerable efficiency, even on existing computer architectures. Since that time logic programming research has intensified. The majority of computing professionals have remained unaware of the developments, however, and for some the announcement that PROLOG had been selected as the core language for the Japanese 'Fifth Generation' project came as a total surprise. This thesis aims to describe the context, character and development of logic programming. It explains why a radical departure from existing software practices needs to be seriously discussed; it identifies the characteristic features of logic programming, and the practical realisation of these features in current logic programming systems; and it outlines the programming methodology which is proposed for logic programming. The problems and limitations of existing logic programming systems are described and some proposals for development are discussed. The thesis is in three parts. Part One traces the development of programming since the early days of computing. It shows how the problems of software complexity which were addressed by the 'structured programming' school have not been overcome: the software crisis remains severe and seems to require fundamental changes in software practice for its solution. Part Two describes the foundations of logic programming in the procedural interpretation of Horn clauses. Fundamental to logic programming is shown to be the separation of the logic of an algorithm from its control. At present, however, both the logic and the control aspects of logic programming present problems; the first in terms of the extent of the language which is used, and the second in terms of the control strategy which should be applied in order to produce solutions. These problems are described and various proposals, including some which have been incorporated into implemented systems, are described. Part Three discusses the software development methodology which is proposed for logic programming. Some of the experience of practical applications is related. Logic programming is considered in the aspects of its potential for parallel execution and in its relationship to functional programming, and some possible criticisms of the problem-solving potential of logic are described. The conclusion is that although logic programming inevitably has some problems which are yet to be solved, it seems to offer answers to several issues which are at the heart of the software crisis. The potential contribution of logic programming towards the development of software should be substantial

Set of support, demodulation, paramodulation: a historical perspective

This article is a tribute to the scientific legacy of automated reasoning pioneer and JAR founder Lawrence T. (Larry) Wos. Larry's main technical contributions were the set-of-support strategy for resolution theorem proving, and the demodulation and paramodulation inference rules for building equality into resolution. Starting from the original definitions of these concepts in Larry's papers, this survey traces their evolution, unearthing the often forgotten trails that connect Larry's original definitions to those that became standard in the field

Analyzing Satisfiability and Refutability in Selected Constraint Systems

This dissertation is concerned with the satisfiability and refutability problems for several constraint systems. We examine both Boolean constraint systems, in which each variable is limited to the values true and false, and polyhedral constraint systems, in which each variable is limited to the set of real numbers R in the case of linear polyhedral systems or the set of integers Z in the case of integer polyhedral systems. An important aspect of our research is that we focus on providing certificates. That is, we provide satisfying assignments or easily checkable proofs of infeasibility depending on whether the instance is feasible or not. Providing easily checkable certificates has become a much sought after feature in algorithms, especially in light of spectacular failures in the implementations of some well-known algorithms. There exist a number of problems in the constraint-solving domain for which efficient algorithms have been proposed, but which lack a certifying counterpart. When examining Boolean constraint systems, we specifically look at systems of 2-CNF clauses and systems of Horn clauses. When examining polyhedral constraint systems, we specifically look at systems of difference constraints, systems of UTVPI constraints, and systems of Horn constraints. For each examined system, we determine several properties of general refutations and determine the complexity of finding restricted refutations. These restricted forms of refutation include read-once refutations, in which each constraint can be used at most once; literal-once refutations, in which for each literal at most one constraint containing that literal can be used; and unit refutations, in which each step of the refutation must use a constraint containing exactly one literal. The advantage of read-once refutations is that they are guaranteed to be short. Thus, while not every constraint system has a read-once refutation, the small size of the refutation guarantees easy checkability