Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction, and Structure for Verification and Synthesis

Even with impressive advances in automated formal methods, certain problems in system verification and synthesis remain challenging. Examples include the verification of quantitative properties of software involving constraints on timing and energy consumption, and the automatic synthesis of systems from specifications. The major challenges include environment modeling, incompleteness in specifications, and the complexity of underlying decision problems. This position paper proposes sciduction, an approach to tackle these challenges by integrating inductive inference, deductive reasoning, and structure hypotheses. Deductive reasoning, which leads from general rules or concepts to conclusions about specific problem instances, includes techniques such as logical inference and constraint solving. Inductive inference, which generalizes from specific instances to yield a concept, includes algorithmic learning from examples. Structure hypotheses are used to define the class of artifacts, such as invariants or program fragments, generated during verification or synthesis. Sciduction constrains inductive and deductive reasoning using structure hypotheses, and actively combines inductive and deductive reasoning: for instance, deductive techniques generate examples for learning, and inductive reasoning is used to guide the deductive engines. We illustrate this approach with three applications: (i) timing analysis of software; (ii) synthesis of loop-free programs, and (iii) controller synthesis for hybrid systems. Some future applications are also discussed

Pac-Learning Recursive Logic Programs: Efficient Algorithms

We present algorithms that learn certain classes of function-free recursive logic programs in polynomial time from equivalence queries. In particular, we show that a single k-ary recursive constant-depth determinate clause is learnable. Two-clause programs consisting of one learnable recursive clause and one constant-depth determinate non-recursive clause are also learnable, if an additional ``basecase'' oracle is assumed. These results immediately imply the pac-learnability of these classes. Although these classes of learnable recursive programs are very constrained, it is shown in a companion paper that they are maximally general, in that generalizing either class in any natural way leads to a computationally difficult learning problem. Thus, taken together with its companion paper, this paper establishes a boundary of efficient learnability for recursive logic programs.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for any accompanying file

Qualitative System Identification from Imperfect Data

Experience in the physical sciences suggests that the only realistic means of understanding complex systems is through the use of mathematical models. Typically, this has come to mean the identification of quantitative models expressed as differential equations. Quantitative modelling works best when the structure of the model (i.e., the form of the equations) is known; and the primary concern is one of estimating the values of the parameters in the model. For complex biological systems, the model-structure is rarely known and the modeler has to deal with both model-identification and parameter-estimation. In this paper we are concerned with providing automated assistance to the first of these problems. Specifically, we examine the identification by machine of the structural relationships between experimentally observed variables. These relationship will be expressed in the form of qualitative abstractions of a quantitative model. Such qualitative models may not only provide clues to the precise quantitative model, but also assist in understanding the essence of that model. Our position in this paper is that background knowledge incorporating system modelling principles can be used to constrain effectively the set of good qualitative models. Utilising the model-identification framework provided by Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) we present empirical support for this position using a series of increasingly complex artificial datasets. The results are obtained with qualitative and quantitative data subject to varying amounts of noise and different degrees of sparsity. The results also point to the presence of a set of qualitative states, which we term kernel subsets, that may be necessary for a qualitative model-learner to learn correct models. We demonstrate scalability of the method to biological system modelling by identification of the glycolysis metabolic pathway from data

A Multi-Engine Approach to Answer Set Programming

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a truly-declarative programming paradigm proposed in the area of non-monotonic reasoning and logic programming, that has been recently employed in many applications. The development of efficient ASP systems is, thus, crucial. Having in mind the task of improving the solving methods for ASP, there are two usual ways to reach this goal: $(i)$ extending state-of-the-art techniques and ASP solvers, or $(ii)$ designing a new ASP solver from scratch. An alternative to these trends is to build on top of state-of-the-art solvers, and to apply machine learning techniques for choosing automatically the "best" available solver on a per-instance basis. In this paper we pursue this latter direction. We first define a set of cheap-to-compute syntactic features that characterize several aspects of ASP programs. Then, we apply classification methods that, given the features of the instances in a {\sl training} set and the solvers' performance on these instances, inductively learn algorithm selection strategies to be applied to a {\sl test} set. We report the results of a number of experiments considering solvers and different training and test sets of instances taken from the ones submitted to the "System Track" of the 3rd ASP Competition. Our analysis shows that, by applying machine learning techniques to ASP solving, it is possible to obtain very robust performance: our approach can solve more instances compared with any solver that entered the 3rd ASP Competition. (To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).)Comment: 26 pages, 8 figure