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

Strategic Issues, Problems and Challenges in Inductive Theorem Proving

Abstract(Automated) Inductive Theorem Proving (ITP) is a challenging field in automated reasoning and theorem proving. Typically, (Automated) Theorem Proving (TP) refers to methods, techniques and tools for automatically proving general (most often first-order) theorems. Nowadays, the field of TP has reached a certain degree of maturity and powerful TP systems are widely available and used. The situation with ITP is strikingly different, in the sense that proving inductive theorems in an essentially automatic way still is a very challenging task, even for the most advanced existing ITP systems. Both in general TP and in ITP, strategies for guiding the proof search process are of fundamental importance, in automated as well as in interactive or mixed settings. In the paper we will analyze and discuss the most important strategic and proof search issues in ITP, compare ITP with TP, and argue why ITP is in a sense much more challenging. More generally, we will systematically isolate, investigate and classify the main problems and challenges in ITP w.r.t. automation, on different levels and from different points of views. Finally, based on this analysis we will present some theses about the state of the art in the field, possible criteria for what could be considered as substantial progress, and promising lines of research for the future, towards (more) automated ITP

Analyzing Satisfiability and Refutability in Selected Constraint Systems

This dissertation is concerned with the satisfiability and refutability problems for several constraint systems. We examine both Boolean constraint systems, in which each variable is limited to the values true and false, and polyhedral constraint systems, in which each variable is limited to the set of real numbers R in the case of linear polyhedral systems or the set of integers Z in the case of integer polyhedral systems. An important aspect of our research is that we focus on providing certificates. That is, we provide satisfying assignments or easily checkable proofs of infeasibility depending on whether the instance is feasible or not. Providing easily checkable certificates has become a much sought after feature in algorithms, especially in light of spectacular failures in the implementations of some well-known algorithms. There exist a number of problems in the constraint-solving domain for which efficient algorithms have been proposed, but which lack a certifying counterpart. When examining Boolean constraint systems, we specifically look at systems of 2-CNF clauses and systems of Horn clauses. When examining polyhedral constraint systems, we specifically look at systems of difference constraints, systems of UTVPI constraints, and systems of Horn constraints. For each examined system, we determine several properties of general refutations and determine the complexity of finding restricted refutations. These restricted forms of refutation include read-once refutations, in which each constraint can be used at most once; literal-once refutations, in which for each literal at most one constraint containing that literal can be used; and unit refutations, in which each step of the refutation must use a constraint containing exactly one literal. The advantage of read-once refutations is that they are guaranteed to be short. Thus, while not every constraint system has a read-once refutation, the small size of the refutation guarantees easy checkability

The ICS Decision Procedures for Embedded Deduction

Automated theorem proving... linear arithmetic, and lists. The ground (i.e., quantifier-free) fragment of many combinations is decidable when the fully quantified combination is not, and practical experience indicates that automation of the ground case is adequate for most applications. Practical experience also suggests several other desiderata for an effective deductive service. Some applications (e.g., construction of abstractions) invoke their deductive service a huge number of times in the course of a single calculation, so that performance of the service must be very good. Other applications such as proof search explore many variations on a formula (i.e., alternately asserting and denying various combinations of its premises), so the deductive service should not examine individual formulas in isolation, but should provide a rich application programming interface that supports incremental assertion, retraction, and querying of formulas. Other applications such as test case generation..