Matching Logic

This paper presents matching logic, a first-order logic (FOL) variant for specifying and reasoning about structure by means of patterns and pattern matching. Its sentences, the patterns, are constructed using variables, symbols, connectives and quantifiers, but no difference is made between function and predicate symbols. In models, a pattern evaluates into a power-set domain (the set of values that match it), in contrast to FOL where functions and predicates map into a regular domain. Matching logic uniformly generalizes several logical frameworks important for program analysis, such as: propositional logic, algebraic specification, FOL with equality, modal logic, and separation logic. Patterns can specify separation requirements at any level in any program configuration, not only in the heaps or stores, without any special logical constructs for that: the very nature of pattern matching is that if two structures are matched as part of a pattern, then they can only be spatially separated. Like FOL, matching logic can also be translated into pure predicate logic with equality, at the same time admitting its own sound and complete proof system. A practical aspect of matching logic is that FOL reasoning with equality remains sound, so off-the-shelf provers and SMT solvers can be used for matching logic reasoning. Matching logic is particularly well-suited for reasoning about programs in programming languages that have an operational semantics, but it is not limited to this

Matching bias in syllogistic reasoning: Evidence for a dual-process account from response times and confidence ratings

We examined matching bias in syllogistic reasoning by analysing response times, confidence ratings, and individual differences. Roberts’ (2005) “negations paradigm” was used to generate conflict between the surface features of problems and the logical status of conclusions. The experiment replicated matching bias effects in conclusion evaluation (Stupple & Waterhouse, 2009), revealing increased processing times for matching/logic “conflict problems”. Results paralleled chronometric evidence from the belief bias paradigm indicating that logic/belief conflict problems take longer to process than non-conflict problems (Stupple, Ball, Evans, & Kamal-Smith, 2011). Individuals’ response times for conflict problems also showed patterns of association with the degree of overall normative responding. Acceptance rates, response times, metacognitive confidence judgements, and individual differences all converged in supporting dual-process theory. This is noteworthy because dual-process predictions about heuristic/analytic conflict in syllogistic reasoning generalised from the belief bias paradigm to a situation where matching features of conclusions, rather than beliefs, were set in opposition to logic

Seven strategies for tolerating highly defective fabrication

In this article we present an architecture that supports fine-grained sparing and resource matching. The base logic structure is a set of interconnected PLAs. The PLAs and their interconnections consist of large arrays of interchangeable nanowires, which serve as programmable product and sum terms and as programmable interconnect links. Each nanowire can have several defective programmable junctions. We can test nanowires for functionality and use only the subset that provides appropriate conductivity and electrical characteristics. We then perform a matching between nanowire junction programmability and application logic needs to use almost all the nanowires even though most of them have defective junctions. We employ seven high-level strategies to achieve this level of defect tolerance

Hidden protocols: Modifying our expectations in an evolving world

When agents know a protocol, this leads them to have expectations about future observations. Agents can update their knowledge by matching their actual observations with the expected ones. They eliminate states where they do not match. In this paper, we study how agents perceive protocols that are not commonly known, and propose a semantics-driven logical framework to reason about knowledge in such scenarios. In particular, we introduce the notion of epistemic expectation models and a propositional dynamic logic-style epistemic logic for reasoning about knowledge via matching agentsÊ expectations to their observations. It is shown how epistemic expectation models can be obtained from epistemic protocols. Furthermore, a characterization is presented of the effective equivalence of epistemic protocols. We introduce a new logic that incorporates updates of protocols and that can model reasoning about knowledge and observations. Finally, the framework is extended to incorporate fact-changing actions, and a worked-out example is given. © 2013 Elsevier B.V

An ontology for software component matching

Matching is a central activity in the discovery and assembly of reusable software components. We investigate how ontology technologies can be utilised to support software component development. We use description logics, which underlie Semantic Web ontology languages such as OWL, to develop an ontology for matching requested and provided components. A link between modal logic and description logics will prove invaluable for the provision of reasoning support for component behaviour

A general approach to define binders using matching logic

We propose a novel shallow embedding of binders using matching logic, where the binding behavior of object-level binders is obtained for free from the behavior of the built-in existential binder of matching logic. We show that binders in various logical systems such as lambda-calculus, System F, pi-calculus, pure type systems, etc., can be defined in matching logic. We show the correctness of our definitions by proving conservative extension theorems, which state that a sequent/judgment is provable in the original system if and only if it is provable in matching logic. An appealing aspect of our embedding of binders in matching logic is that it yields models to all binders, also for free. We show that models yielded by matching logic are deductively complete to the formal reasoning in the original systems. For lambda-calculus, we further show that the yielded models are representationally complete---a desired property that is not enjoyed by many existing lambda-calculus semantics.Ope