Sharing HOL4 and HOL Light proof knowledge

New proof assistant developments often involve concepts similar to already formalized ones. When proving their properties, a human can often take inspiration from the existing formalized proofs available in other provers or libraries. In this paper we propose and evaluate a number of methods, which strengthen proof automation by learning from proof libraries of different provers. Certain conjectures can be proved directly from the dependencies induced by similar proofs in the other library. Even if exact correspondences are not found, learning-reasoning systems can make use of the association between proved theorems and their characteristics to predict the relevant premises. Such external help can be further combined with internal advice. We evaluate the proposed knowledge-sharing methods by reproving the HOL Light and HOL4 standard libraries. The learning-reasoning system HOL(y)Hammer, whose single best strategy could automatically find proofs for 30% of the HOL Light problems, can prove 40% with the knowledge from HOL4

Premise Selection and External Provers for HOL4

Learning-assisted automated reasoning has recently gained popularity among the users of Isabelle/HOL, HOL Light, and Mizar. In this paper, we present an add-on to the HOL4 proof assistant and an adaptation of the HOLyHammer system that provides machine learning-based premise selection and automated reasoning also for HOL4. We efficiently record the HOL4 dependencies and extract features from the theorem statements, which form a basis for premise selection. HOLyHammer transforms the HOL4 statements in the various TPTP-ATP proof formats, which are then processed by the ATPs. We discuss the different evaluation settings: ATPs, accessible lemmas, and premise numbers. We measure the performance of HOLyHammer on the HOL4 standard library. The results are combined accordingly and compared with the HOL Light experiments, showing a comparably high quality of predictions. The system directly benefits HOL4 users by automatically finding proofs dependencies that can be reconstructed by Metis

Translating HOL to Dedukti

Dedukti is a logical framework based on the lambda-Pi-calculus modulo rewriting, which extends the lambda-Pi-calculus with rewrite rules. In this paper, we show how to translate the proofs of a family of HOL proof assistants to Dedukti. The translation preserves binding, typing, and reduction. We implemented this translation in an automated tool and used it to successfully translate the OpenTheory standard library.Comment: In Proceedings PxTP 2015, arXiv:1507.0837

Lassie: HOL4 Tactics by Example

Proof engineering efforts using interactive theorem proving have yielded several impressive projects in software systems and mathematics. A key obstacle to such efforts is the requirement that the domain expert is also an expert in the low-level details in constructing the proof in a theorem prover. In particular, the user needs to select a sequence of tactics that lead to a successful proof, a task that in general requires knowledge of the exact names and use of a large set of tactics. We present Lassie, a tactic framework for the HOL4 theorem prover that allows individual users to define their own tactic language by example and give frequently used tactics or tactic combinations easier-to-remember names. The core of Lassie is an extensible semantic parser, which allows the user to interactively extend the tactic language through a process of definitional generalization. Defining tactics in Lassie thus does not require any knowledge in implementing custom tactics, while proofs written in Lassie retain the correctness guarantees provided by the HOL4 system. We show through case studies how Lassie can be used in small and larger proofs by novice and more experienced interactive theorem prover users, and how we envision it to ease the learning curve in a HOL4 tutorial

A Verified Theorem Prover for Higher-Order Logic

This thesis is about mechanically establishing the correctness of computer programs.\ua0In particular, we are interested in establishing the correctness of tools used in computer-aided mathematics. We build on tools for proof-producing program synthesis, and verified compilation, and a verified theorem proving kernel.\ua0With these, we have produced an interactive theorem prover for higher-order logic, called Candle, that is verified to accept only true theorems.\ua0To the best of our knowledge, Candle is the only interactive theorem prover for higher-order logic that has been verified to this degree.Candle and all technology that underpins it is developed using the HOL4 theorem prover.\ua0We use proof-producing synthesis and the verified CakeML compiler to obtain a machine code executable for the Candle theorem prover.\ua0Because the CakeML compiler is verified to preserve program semantics, we are able to obtain a soundness result about the machine code which implements the Candle theorem prover

Graph Representations for Higher-Order Logic and Theorem Proving

This paper presents the first use of graph neural networks (GNNs) for higher-order proof search and demonstrates that GNNs can improve upon state-of-the-art results in this domain. Interactive, higher-order theorem provers allow for the formalization of most mathematical theories and have been shown to pose a significant challenge for deep learning. Higher-order logic is highly expressive and, even though it is well-structured with a clearly defined grammar and semantics, there still remains no well-established method to convert formulas into graph-based representations. In this paper, we consider several graphical representations of higher-order logic and evaluate them against the HOList benchmark for higher-order theorem proving

Proofgold: Blockchain for Formal Methods

Proofgold is a peer to peer cryptocurrency making use of formal logic. Users can publish theories and then develop a theory by publishing documents with definitions, conjectures and proofs. The blockchain records the theories and their state of development (e.g., which theorems have been proven and when). Two of the main theories are a form of classical set theory (for formalizing mathematics) and an intuitionistic theory of higher-order abstract syntax (for reasoning about syntax with binders). We have also significantly modified the open source Proofgold Core client software to create a faster, more stable and more efficient client, Proofgold Lava. Two important changes are the cryptography code and the database code, and we discuss these improvements. We also discuss how the Proofgold network can be used to support large formalization efforts