An easy way to obtain strong duality results in linear, linear semidefinite and linear semi-infinite programming

In linear programming it is known that an appropriate non-homogeneous Farkas Lemma leads to a short proof of the strong duality results for a pair of primal and dual programs. By using a corresponding generalized Farkas lemma we give a similar proof of the strong duality results for semidefinite programs under constraint qualifications. The proof includes optimality conditions. The same approach leads to corresponding results for linear semi-infinite programs. For completeness, the proofs for linear programs and the proofs of all auxiliary lemmata for the semidefinite case are included

Termination Proofs for Logic Programs with Tabling

Tabled logic programming is receiving increasing attention in the Logic Programming community. It avoids many of the shortcomings of SLD execution and provides a more flexible and often extremely efficient execution mechanism for logic programs. In particular, tabled execution of logic programs terminates more often than execution based on SLD-resolution. In this article, we introduce two notions of universal termination of logic programming with Tabling: quasi-termination and (the stronger notion of) LG-termination. We present sufficient conditions for these two notions of termination, namely quasi-acceptability and LG-acceptability, and we show that these conditions are also necessary in case the tabling is well-chosen. Starting from these conditions, we give modular termination proofs, i.e., proofs capable of combining termination proofs of separate programs to obtain termination proofs of combined programs. Finally, in the presence of mode information, we state sufficient conditions which form the basis for automatically proving termination in a constraint-based way.Comment: 48 pages, 6 figures, submitted to ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL

On choice rules in dependent type theory

In a dependent type theory satisfying the propositions as types correspondence together with the proofs-as-programs paradigm, the validity of the unique choice rule or even more of the choice rule says that the extraction of a computable witness from an existential statement under hypothesis can be performed within the same theory. Here we show that the unique choice rule, and hence the choice rule, are not valid both in Coquand\u2019s Calculus of Constructions with indexed sum types, list types and binary disjoint sums and in its predicative version implemented in the intensional level of the Minimalist Founda- tion. This means that in these theories the extraction of computational witnesses from existential statements must be performed in a more ex- pressive proofs-as-programs theory

Proving uniformity and independence by self-composition and coupling

Proof by coupling is a classical proof technique for establishing probabilistic properties of two probabilistic processes, like stochastic dominance and rapid mixing of Markov chains. More recently, couplings have been investigated as a useful abstraction for formal reasoning about relational properties of probabilistic programs, in particular for modeling reduction-based cryptographic proofs and for verifying differential privacy. In this paper, we demonstrate that probabilistic couplings can be used for verifying non-relational probabilistic properties. Specifically, we show that the program logic pRHL---whose proofs are formal versions of proofs by coupling---can be used for formalizing uniformity and probabilistic independence. We formally verify our main examples using the EasyCrypt proof assistant

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

Formalizing Termination Proofs under Polynomial Quasi-interpretations

Usual termination proofs for a functional program require to check all the possible reduction paths. Due to an exponential gap between the height and size of such the reduction tree, no naive formalization of termination proofs yields a connection to the polynomial complexity of the given program. We solve this problem employing the notion of minimal function graph, a set of pairs of a term and its normal form, which is defined as the least fixed point of a monotone operator. We show that termination proofs for programs reducing under lexicographic path orders (LPOs for short) and polynomially quasi-interpretable can be optimally performed in a weak fragment of Peano arithmetic. This yields an alternative proof of the fact that every function computed by an LPO-terminating, polynomially quasi-interpretable program is computable in polynomial space. The formalization is indeed optimal since every polynomial-space computable function can be computed by such a program. The crucial observation is that inductive definitions of minimal function graphs under LPO-terminating programs can be approximated with transfinite induction along LPOs.Comment: In Proceedings FICS 2015, arXiv:1509.0282