2,713 research outputs found

    Proving Finite Satisfiability of Deductive Databases

    Get PDF
    It is shown how certain refutation methods can be extended into semi-decision procedures that are complete for both unsatisfiability and finite satisfiability. The proposed extension is justified by a new characterization of finite satisfiability. This research was motivated by a database design problem: Deduction rules and integrity constraints in definite databases have to be finitely satisfiabl

    Mixing HOL and Coq in Dedukti (Extended Abstract)

    Full text link
    We use Dedukti as a logical framework for interoperability. We use automated tools to translate different developments made in HOL and in Coq to Dedukti, and we combine them to prove new results. We illustrate our approach with a concrete example where we instantiate a sorting algorithm written in Coq with the natural numbers of HOL.Comment: In Proceedings PxTP 2015, arXiv:1507.0837

    Sharing a Library between Proof Assistants: Reaching out to the HOL Family

    Get PDF
    We observe today a large diversity of proof systems. This diversity has the negative consequence that a lot of theorems are proved many times. Unlike programming languages, it is difficult for these systems to co-operate because they do not implement the same logic. Logical frameworks are a class of theorem provers that overcome this issue by their capacity of implementing various logics. In this work, we study the STTforall logic, an extension of Simple Type Theory that has been encoded in the logical framework Dedukti. We present a translation from this logic to OpenTheory, a proof system and interoperability tool between provers of the HOL family. We have used this translation to export an arithmetic library containing Fermat's little theorem to OpenTheory and to two other proof systems that are Coq and Matita.Comment: In Proceedings LFMTP 2018, arXiv:1807.0135

    Strict General Setting for Building Decision Procedures into Theorem Provers

    Get PDF
    The efficient and flexible incorporating of decision procedures into theorem provers is very important for their successful use. There are several approaches for combining and augmenting of decision procedures; some of them support handling uninterpreted functions, congruence closure, lemma invoking etc. In this paper we present a variant of one general setting for building decision procedures into theorem provers (gs framework [18]). That setting is based on macro inference rules motivated by techniques used in different approaches. The general setting enables a simple describing of different combination/augmentation schemes. In this paper, we further develop and extend this setting by an imposed ordering on the macro inference rules. That ordering leads to a ”strict setting”. It makes implementing and using variants of well-known or new schemes within this framework a very easy task even for a non-expert user. Also, this setting enables easy comparison of different combination/augmentation schemes and combination of their ideas

    A resolution principle for clauses with constraints

    Get PDF
    We introduce a general scheme for handling clauses whose variables are constrained by an underlying constraint theory. In general, constraints can be seen as quantifier restrictions as they filter out the values that can be assigned to the variables of a clause (or an arbitrary formulae with restricted universal or existential quantifier) in any of the models of the constraint theory. We present a resolution principle for clauses with constraints, where unification is replaced by testing constraints for satisfiability over the constraint theory. We show that this constrained resolution is sound and complete in that a set of clauses with constraints is unsatisfiable over the constraint theory if we can deduce a constrained empty clause for each model of the constraint theory, such that the empty clauses constraint is satisfiable in that model. We show also that we cannot require a better result in general, but we discuss certain tractable cases, where we need at most finitely many such empty clauses or even better only one of them as it is known in classical resolution, sorted resolution or resolution with theory unification

    On abduction and answer generation through constrained resolution

    Get PDF
    Recently, extensions of constrained logic programming and constrained resolution for theorem proving have been introduced, that consider constraints, which are interpreted under an open world assumption. We discuss relationships between applications of these approaches for query answering in knowledge base systems on the one hand and abduction-based hypothetical reasoning on the other hand. We show both that constrained resolution can be used as an operationalization of (some limited form of) abduction and that abduction is the logical status of an answer generation process through constrained resolution, ie., it is an abductive but not a deductive form of reasoning

    SPEEDY: An Eclipse-based IDE for invariant inference

    Full text link
    SPEEDY is an Eclipse-based IDE for exploring techniques that assist users in generating correct specifications, particularly including invariant inference algorithms and tools. It integrates with several back-end tools that propose invariants and will incorporate published algorithms for inferring object and loop invariants. Though the architecture is language-neutral, current SPEEDY targets C programs. Building and using SPEEDY has confirmed earlier experience demonstrating the importance of showing and editing specifications in the IDEs that developers customarily use, automating as much of the production and checking of specifications as possible, and showing counterexample information directly in the source code editing environment. As in previous work, automation of specification checking is provided by back-end SMT solvers. However, reducing the effort demanded of software developers using formal methods also requires a GUI design that guides users in writing, reviewing, and correcting specifications and automates specification inference.Comment: In Proceedings F-IDE 2014, arXiv:1404.578
    corecore