Learning Instantiation in First-Order Logic

Contains fulltext : 286055.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)AITP 202

First-Order Logic Theorem Proving and Model Building via Approximation and Instantiation

In this paper we consider first-order logic theorem proving and model building via approximation and instantiation. Given a clause set we propose its approximation into a simplified clause set where satisfiability is decidable. The approximation extends the signature and preserves unsatisfiability: if the simplified clause set is satisfiable in some model, so is the original clause set in the same model interpreted in the original signature. A refutation generated by a decision procedure on the simplified clause set can then either be lifted to a refutation in the original clause set, or it guides a refinement excluding the previously found unliftable refutation. This way the approach is refutationally complete. We do not step-wise lift refutations but conflicting cores, finite unsatisfiable clause sets representing at least one refutation. The approach is dual to many existing approaches in the literature because our approximation preserves unsatisfiability

Decidability of the Monadic Shallow Linear First-Order Fragment with Straight Dismatching Constraints

The monadic shallow linear Horn fragment is well-known to be decidable and has many application, e.g., in security protocol analysis, tree automata, or abstraction refinement. It was a long standing open problem how to extend the fragment to the non-Horn case, preserving decidability, that would, e.g., enable to express non-determinism in protocols. We prove decidability of the non-Horn monadic shallow linear fragment via ordered resolution further extended with dismatching constraints and discuss some applications of the new decidable fragment.Comment: 29 pages, long version of CADE-26 pape

Scavenger 0.1: A Theorem Prover Based on Conflict Resolution

This paper introduces Scavenger, the first theorem prover for pure first-order logic without equality based on the new conflict resolution calculus. Conflict resolution has a restricted resolution inference rule that resembles (a first-order generalization of) unit propagation as well as a rule for assuming decision literals and a rule for deriving new clauses by (a first-order generalization of) conflict-driven clause learning.Comment: Published at CADE 201

Symbolic execution proofs for higher order store programs

Higher order store programs are programs which store, manipulate and invoke code at runtime. Important examples of higher order store programs include operating system kernels which dynamically load and unload kernel modules. Yet conventional Hoare logics, which provide no means of representing changes to code at runtime, are not applicable to such programs. Recently, however, new logics using nested Hoare triples have addressed this shortcoming. In this paper we describe, from top to bottom, a sound semi-automated verification system for higher order store programs. We give a programming language with higher order store features, define an assertion language with nested triples for specifying such programs, and provide reasoning rules for proving programs correct. We then present in full our algorithms for automatically constructing correctness proofs. In contrast to earlier work, the language also includes ordinary (fixed) procedures and mutable local variables, making it easy to model programs which perform dynamic loading and other higher order store operations. We give an operational semantics for programs and a step-indexed interpretation of assertions, and use these to show soundness of our reasoning rules, which include a deep frame rule which allows more modular proofs. Our automated reasoning algorithms include a scheme for separation logic based symbolic execution of programs, and automated provers for solving various kinds of entailment problems. The latter are presented in the form of sets of derived proof rules which are constrained enough to be read as a proof search algorithm

SGGS theorem proving: an exposition

We present in expository style the main ideas in SGGS, which stands for Semantically-Guided Goal-Sensitive theorem proving. SGGS uses sequences of constrained clauses to represent models, instance generation to go from a candidate model to the next, and resolution as well as other inferences to repair the model. SGGS is refutationally complete for first-order logic, model based, semantically guided, proof confluent, and goal sensitive, which appears to be a rare combination of features. In this paper we describe the core of SGGS in a narrative style, emphasizing ideas and trying to keep technicalities to a minimum, in order to advertise it to builders and users of theorem provers

Bounded Refinement Types

We present a notion of bounded quantification for refinement types and show how it expands the expressiveness of refinement typing by using it to develop typed combinators for: (1) relational algebra and safe database access, (2) Floyd-Hoare logic within a state transformer monad equipped with combinators for branching and looping, and (3) using the above to implement a refined IO monad that tracks capabilities and resource usage. This leap in expressiveness comes via a translation to "ghost" functions, which lets us retain the automated and decidable SMT based checking and inference that makes refinement typing effective in practice.Comment: 14 pages, International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 201

On the Expressivity and Applicability of Model Representation Formalisms

A number of first-order calculi employ an explicit model representation formalism for automated reasoning and for detecting satisfiability. Many of these formalisms can represent infinite Herbrand models. The first-order fragment of monadic, shallow, linear, Horn (MSLH) clauses, is such a formalism used in the approximation refinement calculus. Our first result is a finite model property for MSLH clause sets. Therefore, MSLH clause sets cannot represent models of clause sets with inherently infinite models. Through a translation to tree automata, we further show that this limitation also applies to the linear fragments of implicit generalizations, which is the formalism used in the model-evolution calculus, to atoms with disequality constraints, the formalisms used in the non-redundant clause learning calculus (NRCL), and to atoms with membership constraints, a formalism used for example in decision procedures for algebraic data types. Although these formalisms cannot represent models of clause sets with inherently infinite models, through an additional approximation step they can. This is our second main result. For clause sets including the definition of an equivalence relation with the help of an additional, novel approximation, called reflexive relation splitting, the approximation refinement calculus can automatically show satisfiability through the MSLH clause set formalism.Comment: 15 page