Applications and extensions of context-sensitive rewriting

[EN] Context-sensitive rewriting is a restriction of term rewriting which is obtained by imposing replacement restrictions on the arguments of function symbols. It has proven useful to analyze computational properties of programs written in sophisticated rewriting-based programming languages such asCafeOBJ, Haskell, Maude, OBJ*, etc. Also, a number of extensions(e.g., to conditional rewritingor constrained equational systems) and generalizations(e.g., controlled rewritingor forbidden patterns) of context-sensitive rewriting have been proposed. In this paper, we provide an overview of these applications and related issues. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Partially supported by the EU (FEDER), and projects RTI2018-094403-B-C32 and PROMETEO/2019/098.Lucas Alba, S. (2021). Applications and extensions of context-sensitive rewriting. Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming. 121:1-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlamp.2021.10068013312

Variant-Based Satisfiability

Although different satisfiability decision procedures can be combined by algorithms such as those of Nelson-Oppen or Shostak, current tools typically can only support a finite number of theories to use in such combinations. To make SMT solving more widely applicable, generic satisfiability algorithms that can allow a potentially infinite number of decidable theories to be user-definable, instead of needing to be built in by the implementers, are highly desirable. This work studies how folding variant narrowing, a generic unification algorithm that offers good extensibility in unification theory, can be extended to a generic variant-based satisfiability algorithm for the initial algebras of its user-specified input theories when such theories satisfy Comon-Delaune's finite variant property (FVP) and some extra conditions. Several, increasingly larger infinite classes of theories whose initial algebras enjoy decidable variant-based satisfiability are identified, and a method based on descent maps to bring other theories into these classes and to improve the generic algorithm's efficiency is proposed and illustrated with examples.Partially supported by NSF Grant CNS 13-19109.Ope

Using Well-Founded Relations for Proving Operational Termination

[EN] In this paper, we study operational termination, a proof theoretical notion for capturing the termination behavior of computational systems. We prove that operational termination can be characterized at different levels by means of well- founded relations on specific formulas which can be obtained from the considered system. We show how to obtain such well-founded relations from logical models which can be automatically generated using existing tools.Partially supported by the EU (FEDER), Projects TIN2015-69175-C4-1-R, and GV PROMETEOII/2015/013.Lucas Alba, S. (2020). Using Well-Founded Relations for Proving Operational Termination. Journal of Automated Reasoning. 64(2):167-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-019-09514-2S167195642Alarcón, B., Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S., Navarro-Marset, R.: Proving termination properties with MU-TERM. In: Proceedings of AMAST’10, LNCS, vol. 6486, pp. 201–208, Springer (2011)Aguirre, L., Martí-Oliet, N., Palomino, M., Pita, I.: Sentence-normalized conditional narrowing modulo in rewriting logic and Maude. J. Automat. Reason. 60(4), 421–463 (2018)Arts, T., Giesl, J.: Proving innermost normalisation automatically. In: Proceedings of RTA’97, LNCS, vol. 1232, pp. 157–171, Springer, Berlin (1997)Arts, T., Giesl, J.: Termination of term rewriting using dependency pairs. Theor. Comput. Sci. 236(1–2), 133–178 (2000)Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)Clavel, M., Durán, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: All About Maude—A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS, vol. 4350, Springer (2007)Durán, F., Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Methods for proving termination of rewriting-based programming languages by transformation. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 248, 93–113 (2009)Durán, F., Lucas, S., Marché, C., Meseguer, J., Urbain, X.: Proving operational termination of membership equational programs. High. Order Symb. Comput. 21(1–2), 59–88 (2008)Falke, S., Kapur, D.: Operational termination of conditional rewriting with built-in numbers and semantic data structures. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 237, 75–90 (2009)Floyd, R.W.: Assigning meanings to programs. Math. Asp. Comput. Sci. 19, 19–32 (1967)Giesl, J., Arts, T.: Verification of Erlang processes by dependency pairs. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 12, 39–72 (2001)Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Mechanizing and improving dependency pairs. J. Autom. Reason. 37(3), 155–203 (2006)Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P.: The dependency pair framework: combining techniques for automated termination proofs. In: Proceedings of LPAR’04, LNAI, vol. 3452, pp. 301–331 (2004)Giesl, J., Schneider-Kamp, P., Thiemann, R.: AProVE 1.2: automatic termination proofs in the dependency pair framework. In: Proceedings of IJCAR’06, LNAI, vol. 4130, pp. 281–286 (2006)Goguen, J., Meseguer, J.: Models and equality for logical programming. In: Proceedings of TAPSOFT’87, LNCS, vol. 250, pp. 1–22 (1987)Goguen, J., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted algebra I: equational deduction for multiple inheritance, overloading, exceptions and partial operations. Theor. Comput. Sci. 105, 217–273 (1992)Gutiérrez, R., Lucas, S., Reinoso, P.: A tool for the automatic generation of logical models of order-sorted first-order theories. In: Proceedings of PROLE’16, pp. 215–230 (2016)Hodges, W.: Model Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)Korp, M., Sternagel, C., Zankl, H., Middeldorp, A.: Tyrolean termination tool 2. In: Proceedings of RTA 2009, LNCS, vol. 5595, pp. 295–304 (2009)Lalement, R.: Computation as Logic. Masson-Prentice Hall International, Paris (1993)Lucas, S.: Context-sensitive rewriting strategies. Inf. Comput. 178(1), 294–343 (2002)Lucas, S.: Use of logical models for proving operational termination in general logics. In: Selected Papers from WRLA’16, LNCS, vol. 9942, pp. 1–21 (2016)Lucas, S.: Directions of operational termination. In: Proceedings of PROLE’18. http://hdl.handle.net/11705/PROLE/2018/009 (2018). Accessed 9 Feb 2019Lucas, S., Gutiérrez, R.: Automatic synthesis of logical models for order-sorted first-order theories. J. Autom. Reason. 60(4), 465–501 (2018)Lucas, S., Gutiérrez, R.: Use of logical models for proving infeasibility in term rewriting. Inf. Process. Lett. 136, 90–95 (2018)Lucas, S., Marché, C., Meseguer, J.: Operational termination of conditional term rewriting systems. Inf. Process. Lett. 95, 446–453 (2005)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Dependency pairs for proving termination properties of conditional term rewriting systems. J. Log. Algebr. Methods Program. 86, 236–268 (2017)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Proving operational termination of declarative programs in general logics. In: Proceedings of PPDP’14, pp. 111–122. ACM Digital Library (2014)McCune, W.: Prover9 & Mace4. http://www.cs.unm.edu/~mccune/prover9/ (2005–2010). Accessed 9 Feb 2019Mendelson, E.: Introduction to Mathematical Logic, 4th edn. Chapman & Hall, London (1997)Meseguer, J.: General logics. In: Logic Colloquium’87, pp. 275–329 (1989)O’Donnell, M.J.: Equational Logic as a Programming Language. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1985)Ohlebusch, E.: Advanced Topics in Term Rewriting. Springer, Berlin (2002)Prawitz, D.: Natural Deduction. A Proof Theoretical Study. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1965. Reprinted by Dover Publications (2006)Rosu, G., Stefanescu, A., Ciobaca, S., Moore, B.M.: One-path reachability logic. In: Proceedings of LICS 2013, pp. 358–367. IEEE Press (2013)Shapiro, S.: Foundations Without Foundationalism: A Case for Second-Order Logic. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1991)Schernhammer, F., Gramlich, B.: Characterizing and proving operational termination of deterministic conditional term rewriting systems. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 79, 659–688 (2010)Serbanuta, T., Rosu, G.: Computationally equivalent elimination of conditions. In: Proceedings of RTA’06, LNCS, vol. 4098, pp. 19–34. Springer, Berlin (2006)Turing, A.M.: Checking a large routine. In: Report of a Conference on High Speed Automatic Calculating Machines, Univ. Math. Lab., Cambridge, pp. 67–69 (1949

Automated Reasoning

This volume, LNAI 13385, constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, IJCAR 2022, held in Haifa, Israel, in August 2022. The 32 full research papers and 9 short papers presented together with two invited talks were carefully reviewed and selected from 85 submissions. The papers focus on the following topics: Satisfiability, SMT Solving,Arithmetic; Calculi and Orderings; Knowledge Representation and Jutsification; Choices, Invariance, Substitutions and Formalization; Modal Logics; Proofs System and Proofs Search; Evolution, Termination and Decision Prolems. This is an open access book

Pseudo-contractions as Gentle Repairs

Updating a knowledge base to remove an unwanted consequence is a challenging task. Some of the original sentences must be either deleted or weakened in such a way that the sentence to be removed is no longer entailed by the resulting set. On the other hand, it is desirable that the existing knowledge be preserved as much as possible, minimising the loss of information. Several approaches to this problem can be found in the literature. In particular, when the knowledge is represented by an ontology, two different families of frameworks have been developed in the literature in the past decades with numerous ideas in common but with little interaction between the communities: applications of AGM-like Belief Change and justification-based Ontology Repair. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between pseudo-contraction operations and gentle repairs. Both aim to avoid the complete deletion of sentences when replacing them with weaker versions is enough to prevent the entailment of the unwanted formula. We show the correspondence between concepts on both sides and investigate under which conditions they are equivalent. Furthermore, we propose a unified notation for the two approaches, which might contribute to the integration of the two areas

Towards the Formal Verification of Model Transformations: An Application to Kermeta

Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) is becoming a popular engineering methodology for developing large-scale software applications, using models and transformations as primary principles. MDE is now being successfully applied to domain-specific languages (DSLs), which target a narrow subject domain like process management, telecommunication, product lines, smartphone applications among others, providing experts high-level and intuitive notations very close to their problem domain. More recently, MDE has been applied to safety-critical applications, where failure may have dramatic consequences, either in terms of economic, ecologic or human losses. These recent application domains call for more robust and more practical approaches for ensuring the correctness of models and model transformations. Testing is the most common technique used in MDE for ensuring the correctness of model transformations, a recurrent, yet unsolved problem in MDE. But testing suffers from the so-called coverage problem, which is unacceptable when safety is at stake. Rather, exhaustive coverage is required in this application domain, which means that transformation designers need to use formal analysis methods and tools to meet this requirement. Unfortunately, two factors seem to limit the use of such methods in an engineer’s daily life. First, a methodological factor, because MDE engineers rarely possess the effective knowledge for deploying formal analysis techniques in their daily life developments. Second, a practical factor, because DSLs do not necessarily have a formal explicit semantics, which is a necessary enabler for exhaustive analysis. In this thesis, we contribute to the problem of formal analysis of model transformations regarding each perspective. On the conceptual side, we propose a methodological framework for engineering verified model transformations based on current best practices. For that purpose, we identify three important dimensions: (i) the transformation being built; (ii) the properties of interest ensuring the transformation’s correctness; and finally, (iii) the verification technique that allows proving these properties with minimal effort. Finding which techniques are better suited for which kind of properties is the concern of the Computer-Aided Verification community. Consequently in this thesis, we focus on studying the relationship between transformations and properties. Our methodological framework introduces two novel notions. A transformation intent gathers all transformations sharing the same purpose, abstracting from the way the transformation is expressed. A property class captures under the same denomination all properties sharing the same form, abstracting away from their underlying property languages. The framework consists of mapping each intent with its characteristic set of property classes, meaning that for proving the correctness of a particular transformation obeying this intent, one has to prove properties of these specific classes. We illustrate the use and utility of our framework through the detailed description of five common intents in MDE, and their application to a case study drawn from the automative software domain, consisting of a chain of more than thirty transformations. On a more practical side, we study the problem of verifying DSLs whose behaviour is expressed with Kermeta. Kermeta is an object-oriented transformation framework aligned with Object Management Group standard specification MOF (Meta-Object Facility). It can be used for defining metamodels and models, as well as their behaviour. Kermeta lacks a formal semantics: we first specify such a semantics, and then choose an appropriate verification domain for handling the analysis one is interested in. Since the semantics is defined at the level of Kermeta’s transformation language itself, our work presents two interesting features: first, any DSL whose behaviour is defined using Kermeta (more precisely, any transformation defined with Kermeta) enjoys a de facto formal underground for free; second, it is easier to define appropriate abstractions for targeting specific analysis for this full-fledged semantics than defining specific semantics for each possible kind of analysis. To illustrate this point, we have selected Maude, a powerful rewriting system based on algebraic specifications equipped with model-checking and theorem-proving capabilities. Maude was chosen because its underlying formalism is close to the mathematical tools we use for specifying the formal semantics, reducing the implementation gap and consequently limiting the possible implementation mistakes. We validate our approach by illustrating behavioural properties of small, yet representative DSLs from the literature

Automated Deduction – CADE 28

This open access book constitutes the proceeding of the 28th International Conference on Automated Deduction, CADE 28, held virtually in July 2021. The 29 full papers and 7 system descriptions presented together with 2 invited papers were carefully reviewed and selected from 76 submissions. CADE is the major forum for the presentation of research in all aspects of automated deduction, including foundations, applications, implementations, and practical experience. The papers are organized in the following topics: Logical foundations; theory and principles; implementation and application; ATP and AI; and system descriptions