Proof planning for logic program synthesis

The area of logic program synthesis is attracting increased interest. Most efforts have concentrated on applying techniques from functional program synthesis to logic program synthesis. This thesis investigates a new approach: Synthesizing logic programs automatically via middle-out reasoning in proof planning.[Bundy et al 90a] suggested middle-out reasoning in proof planning. Middleout reasoning uses variables to represent unknown details of a proof. Unifica¬ tion instantiates the variables in the subsequent planning, while proof planning provides the necessary search control.Middle-out reasoning is used for synthesis by planning the verification of an unknown logic program: The program body is represented with a meta-variable. The planning results both in an instantiation of the program body and a plan for the verification of that program. If the plan executes successfully, the synthesized program is partially correct and complete.Middle-out reasoning is also used to select induction schemes. Finding an appropriate induction scheme in synthesis is difficult, because the recursion in the program, which is unknown at the outset, determines the induction in the proof. In middle-out induction, we set up a schematic step case by representing the constructors applied to the induction variables with meta-variables. Once the step case is complete, the instantiated variables correspond to an induction appropriate to the recursion of the program.The results reported in this thesis are encouraging. The approach has been implemented as an extension to the proof planner CUM [Bundy et al 90c], called Periwinkle, which has been used to synthesize a variety of programs fully automatically

Logic Program Synthesis via Proof Planning

We propose a novel approach to automating the synthesis of logic programs: Logic programs are synthesized as a by-product of the planning of a verification proof. The approach is a two-level one: At the object level, we prove program verification conjectures in a sorted, first-order theory. The conjectures are of the form $\forall \vec{args}. \; prog(\vec{args}) \leftrightarrow spec(\vec{args})$. At the meta-level, we plan the object-level verification with an unspecified program definition. The definition is represented with a (second-order) meta-level variable, which becomes instantiated in the course of the planning. This technique is an application of the Clam proof planning system. Clam is currently powerful enough to plan verification proofs for given programs. We show that, if Clam's use of middle-out reasoning is extended, it will also be able to synthesize programs

Middle-Out Reasoning for Logic Program Synthesis

We propose a novel approach to automating the synthesis of logic programs: Logic programs are synthesized as a by-product of the planning of a verification proof. The approach is a two-level one: At the object level, we prove program verification conjectures in a sorted, first-order theory. The conjectures are of the form 8args \Gamma\Gamma\Gamma\Gamma! : prog(args \Gamma\Gamma\Gamma\Gamma! ) $ spec(args \Gamma\Gamma\Gamma\Gamma! ). At the meta-level, we plan the object-level verification with an unspecified program definition. The definition is represented with a (second-order) meta-level variable, which becomes instantiated in the course of the planning

From Uncertainty Data to Robust Policies for Temporal Logic Planning

We consider the problem of synthesizing robust disturbance feedback policies for systems performing complex tasks. We formulate the tasks as linear temporal logic specifications and encode them into an optimization framework via mixed-integer constraints. Both the system dynamics and the specifications are known but affected by uncertainty. The distribution of the uncertainty is unknown, however realizations can be obtained. We introduce a data-driven approach where the constraints are fulfilled for a set of realizations and provide probabilistic generalization guarantees as a function of the number of considered realizations. We use separate chance constraints for the satisfaction of the specification and operational constraints. This allows us to quantify their violation probabilities independently. We compute disturbance feedback policies as solutions of mixed-integer linear or quadratic optimization problems. By using feedback we can exploit information of past realizations and provide feasibility for a wider range of situations compared to static input sequences. We demonstrate the proposed method on two robust motion-planning case studies for autonomous driving

Relational Rippling: a General Approach

We propose a new version of rippling, called relational rippling. Rippling is a heuristic for guiding proof search, especially in the step cases of inductive proofs. Relational rippling is designed for representations in which value passing is by shared existential variables, as opposed to function nesting. Thus relational rippling can be used to guide reasoning about logic programs or circuits represented as relations. We give an informal motivation and introduction to relational rippling. More details, including formal definitions and termination proofs can be found in the longer version of this paper, [Bundy and Lombart, 1995]