New results on rewrite-based satisfiability procedures

Program analysis and verification require decision procedures to reason on theories of data structures. Many problems can be reduced to the satisfiability of sets of ground literals in theory T. If a sound and complete inference system for first-order logic is guaranteed to terminate on T-satisfiability problems, any theorem-proving strategy with that system and a fair search plan is a T-satisfiability procedure. We prove termination of a rewrite-based first-order engine on the theories of records, integer offsets, integer offsets modulo and lists. We give a modularity theorem stating sufficient conditions for termination on a combinations of theories, given termination on each. The above theories, as well as others, satisfy these conditions. We introduce several sets of benchmarks on these theories and their combinations, including both parametric synthetic benchmarks to test scalability, and real-world problems to test performances on huge sets of literals. We compare the rewrite-based theorem prover E with the validity checkers CVC and CVC Lite. Contrary to the folklore that a general-purpose prover cannot compete with reasoners with built-in theories, the experiments are overall favorable to the theorem prover, showing that not only the rewriting approach is elegant and conceptually simple, but has important practical implications.Comment: To appear in the ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 49 page

Quantifier-Free Interpolation of a Theory of Arrays

The use of interpolants in model checking is becoming an enabling technology to allow fast and robust verification of hardware and software. The application of encodings based on the theory of arrays, however, is limited by the impossibility of deriving quantifier- free interpolants in general. In this paper, we show that it is possible to obtain quantifier-free interpolants for a Skolemized version of the extensional theory of arrays. We prove this in two ways: (1) non-constructively, by using the model theoretic notion of amalgamation, which is known to be equivalent to admit quantifier-free interpolation for universal theories; and (2) constructively, by designing an interpolating procedure, based on solving equations between array updates. (Interestingly, rewriting techniques are used in the key steps of the solver and its proof of correctness.) To the best of our knowledge, this is the first successful attempt of computing quantifier- free interpolants for a variant of the theory of arrays with extensionality

Mace4 Reference Manual and Guide

Mace4 is a program that searches for finite models of first-order formulas. For a given domain size, all instances of the formulas over the domain are constructed. The result is a set of ground clauses with equality. Then, a decision procedure based on ground equational rewriting is applied. If satisfiability is detected, one or more models are printed. Mace4 is a useful complement to first-order theorem provers, with the prover searching for proofs and Mace4 looking for countermodels, and it is useful for work on finite algebras. Mace4 performs better on equational problems than did our previous model-searching program Mace2.Comment: 17 page

What's Decidable About Sequences?

We present a first-order theory of sequences with integer elements, Presburger arithmetic, and regular constraints, which can model significant properties of data structures such as arrays and lists. We give a decision procedure for the quantifier-free fragment, based on an encoding into the first-order theory of concatenation; the procedure has PSPACE complexity. The quantifier-free fragment of the theory of sequences can express properties such as sortedness and injectivity, as well as Boolean combinations of periodic and arithmetic facts relating the elements of the sequence and their positions (e.g., "for all even i's, the element at position i has value i+3 or 2i"). The resulting expressive power is orthogonal to that of the most expressive decidable logics for arrays. Some examples demonstrate that the fragment is also suitable to reason about sequence-manipulating programs within the standard framework of axiomatic semantics.Comment: Fixed a few lapses in the Mergesort exampl

Variant-Based Decidable Satisfiability in Initial Algebras with Predicates

[EN] Decision procedures can be either theory-specific, e.g., Presburger arithmetic, or theory-generic, applying to an infinite number of user-definable theories. Variant satisfiability is a theory-generic procedure for quantifier-free satisfiability in the initial algebra of an order-sorted equational theory (¿,E¿B) under two conditions: (i) E¿B has the finite variant property and B has a finitary unification algorithm; and (ii) (¿,E¿B) protects a constructor subtheory (¿,E¿¿B¿) that is OS-compact. These conditions apply to many user-definable theories, but have a main limitation: they apply well to data structures, but often do not hold for user-definable predicates on such data structures. We present a theory-generic satisfiability decision procedure, and a prototype implementation, extending variant-based satisfiability to initial algebras with user-definable predicates under fairly general conditions.Partially supported by NSF Grant CNS 14-09416, NRL under contract number N00173-17-1-G002, the EU (FEDER), Spanish MINECO project TIN2015-69175- C4-1-R and GV project PROMETEOII/2015/013. Ra´ul Guti´errez was also supported by INCIBE program “Ayudas para la excelencia de los equipos de investigaci´on avanzada en ciberseguridad”.Gutiérrez Gil, R.; Meseguer, J. (2018). Variant-Based Decidable Satisfiability in Initial Algebras with Predicates. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 10855:306-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94460-9_18S30632210855Armando, A., Bonacina, M.P., Ranise, S., Schulz, S.: New results on rewrite-based satisfiability procedures. TOCL 10(1), 4 (2009)Armando, A., Ranise, S., Rusinowitch, M.: A rewriting approach to satisfiability procedures. I&C 183(2), 140–164 (2003)Barrett, C., Shikanian, I., Tinelli, C.: An abstract decision procedure for satisfiability in the theory of inductive data types. JSAT 3, 21–46 (2007)Bouchard, C., Gero, K.A., Lynch, C., Narendran, P.: On forward closure and the finite variant property. In: Fontaine, P., Ringeissen, C., Schmidt, R.A. (eds.) FroCoS 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8152, pp. 327–342. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40885-4_23Bradley, A.R., Manna, Z.: The Calculus of Computation - Decision Procedures with Applications to Verification. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74113-8Cholewa, A., Meseguer, J., Escobar, S.: Variants of variants and the finite variant property. Technical report, CS Dept. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2014). http://hdl.handle.net/2142/47117Ciobaca., S.: Verification of composition of security protocols with applications to electronic voting. Ph.D. thesis, ENS Cachan (2011)Comon, H.: Complete axiomatizations of some quotient term algebras. TCS 118(2), 167–191 (1993)Comon-Lundh, H., Delaune, S.: The finite variant property: how to get rid of some algebraic properties. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, pp. 294–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32033-3_22Dershowitz, N., Jouannaud, J.P.: Rewrite systems. In: Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, North-Holland, vol. B, pp. 243–320 (1990)Dovier, A., Piazza, C., Rossi, G.: A uniform approach to constraint-solving for lists, multisets, compact lists, and sets. TOCL 9(3), 15 (2008)Dross, C., Conchon, S., Kanig, J., Paskevich, A.: Adding decision procedures to SMT solvers using axioms with triggers. JAR 56(4), 387–457 (2016)Escobar, S., Sasse, R., Meseguer, J.: Folding variant narrowing and optimal variant termination. JALP 81, 898–928 (2012)Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Models and equality for logical programming. In: Ehrig, H., Kowalski, R., Levi, G., Montanari, U. (eds.) TAPSOFT 1987. LNCS, vol. 250, pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0014969Goguen, J., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted algebra I: equational deduction for multiple inheritance, overloading, exceptions and partial operations. TCS 105, 217–273 (1992)Gutiérrez, R., Meseguer, J.: Variant satisfiability in initial algebras with predicates. Technical report, CS Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2018). http://hdl.handle.net/2142/99039Jouannaud, J.P., Kirchner, H.: Completion of a set of rules modulo a set of equations. SICOMP 15, 1155–1194 (1986)Kroening, D., Strichman, O.: Decision Procedures - An algorithmic point of view. Texts in TCS. An EATCS Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74105-3Lynch, C., Morawska, B.: Automatic decidability. In: Proceedings of LICS 2002, p. 7. IEEE Computer Society (2002)Lynch, C., Tran, D.-K.: Automatic decidability and combinability revisited. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4603, pp. 328–344. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73595-3_22Meseguer, J.: Variant-based satisfiability in initial algebras. SCP 154, 3–41 (2018)Meseguer, J.: Strict coherence of conditional rewriting modulo axioms. TCS 672, 1–35 (2017)Meseguer, J., Goguen, J.: Initiality, induction and computability. In: Algebraic Methods in Semantics, Cambridge, pp. 459–541 (1985)Meseguer, J., Goguen, J.: Order-sorted algebra solves the constructor-selector, multiple representation and coercion problems. I&C 103(1), 114–158 (1993)Nelson, G., Oppen, D.C.: Simplification by cooperating decision procedures. TOPLAS 1(2), 245–257 (1979)Shostak, R.E.: Deciding combinations of theories. J. ACM 31(1), 1–12 (1984)Skeirik, S., Meseguer, J.: Metalevel algorithms for variant satisfiability. In: Lucanu, D. (ed.) WRLA 2016. LNCS, vol. 9942, pp. 167–184. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44802-2_10Stump, A., Barrett, C.W., Dill, D.L., Levitt, J.R.: A decision procedure for an extensional theory of arrays. In: Proceedings of LICS 2001, pp. 29–37. IEEE (2001)Tushkanova, E., Giorgetti, A., Ringeissen, C., Kouchnarenko, O.: A rule-based system for automatic decidability and combinability. SCP 99, 3–23 (2015

Complexity Hierarchies Beyond Elementary

We introduce a hierarchy of fast-growing complexity classes and show its suitability for completeness statements of many non elementary problems. This hierarchy allows the classification of many decision problems with a non-elementary complexity, which occur naturally in logic, combinatorics, formal languages, verification, etc., with complexities ranging from simple towers of exponentials to Ackermannian and beyond.Comment: Version 3 is the published version in TOCT 8(1:3), 2016. I will keep updating the catalogue of problems from Section 6 in future revision

Disproving in First-Order Logic with Definitions, Arithmetic and Finite Domains

This thesis explores several methods which enable a first-order reasoner to conclude satisfiability of a formula modulo an arithmetic theory. The most general method requires restricting certain quantifiers to range over finite sets; such assumptions are common in the software verification setting. In addition, the use of first-order reasoning allows for an implicit representation of those finite sets, which can avoid scalability problems that affect other quantified reasoning methods. These new techniques form a useful complement to existing methods that are primarily aimed at proving validity. The Superposition calculus for hierarchic theory combinations provides a basis for reasoning modulo theories in a first-order setting. The recent account of ‘weak abstraction’ and related improvements make an mplementation of the calculus practical. Also, for several logical theories of interest Superposition is an effective decision procedure for the quantifier free fragment. The first contribution is an implementation of that calculus (Beagle), including an optimized implementation of Cooper’s algorithm for quantifier elimination in the theory of linear integer arithmetic. This includes a novel means of extracting values for quantified variables in satisfiable integer problems. Beagle won an efficiency award at CADE Automated theorem prover System Competition (CASC)-J7, and won the arithmetic non-theorem category at CASC-25. This implementation is the start point for solving the ‘disproving with theories’ problem. Some hypotheses can be disproved by showing that, together with axioms the hypothesis is unsatisfiable. Often this is relative to other axioms that enrich a base theory by defining new functions. In that case, the disproof is contingent on the satisfiability of the enrichment. Satisfiability in this context is undecidable. Instead, general characterizations of definition formulas, which do not alter the satisfiability status of the main axioms, are given. These general criteria apply to recursive definitions, definitions over lists, and to arrays. This allows proving some non-theorems which are otherwise intractable, and justifies similar disproofs of non-linear arithmetic formulas. When the hypothesis is contingently true, disproof requires proving existence of a model. If the Superposition calculus saturates a clause set, then a model exists, but only when the clause set satisfies a completeness criterion. This requires each instance of an uninterpreted, theory-sorted term to have a definition in terms of theory symbols. The second contribution is a procedure that creates such definitions, given that a subset of quantifiers range over finite sets. Definitions are produced in a counter-example driven way via a sequence of over and under approximations to the clause set. Two descriptions of the method are given: the first uses the component solver modularly, but has an inefficient counter-example heuristic. The second is more general, correcting many of the inefficiencies of the first, yet it requires tracking clauses through a proof. This latter method is shown to apply also to lists and to problems with unbounded quantifiers. Together, these tools give new ways for applying successful first-order reasoning methods to problems involving interpreted theories