LNCS

Extensionality axioms are common when reasoning about data collections, such as arrays and functions in program analysis, or sets in mathematics. An extensionality axiom asserts that two collections are equal if they consist of the same elements at the same indices. Using extensionality is often required to show that two collections are equal. A typical example is the set theory theorem (∀x)(∀y)x∪y = y ∪x. Interestingly, while humans have no problem with proving such set identities using extensionality, they are very hard for superposition theorem provers because of the calculi they use. In this paper we show how addition of a new inference rule, called extensionality resolution, allows first-order theorem provers to easily solve problems no modern first-order theorem prover can solve. We illustrate this by running the VAMPIRE theorem prover with extensionality resolution on a number of set theory and array problems. Extensionality resolution helps VAMPIRE to solve problems from the TPTP library of first-order problems that were never solved before by any prover

A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach to First-Order Logic Theorem Proving

Automated theorem provers have traditionally relied on manually tuned heuristics to guide how they perform proof search. Deep reinforcement learning has been proposed as a way to obviate the need for such heuristics, however, its deployment in automated theorem proving remains a challenge. In this paper we introduce TRAIL, a system that applies deep reinforcement learning to saturation-based theorem proving. TRAIL leverages (a) a novel neural representation of the state of a theorem prover and (b) a novel characterization of the inference selection process in terms of an attention-based action policy. We show through systematic analysis that these mechanisms allow TRAIL to significantly outperform previous reinforcement-learning-based theorem provers on two benchmark datasets for first-order logic automated theorem proving (proving around 15% more theorems)

HoCHC: A Refutationally Complete and Semantically Invariant System of Higher-order Logic Modulo Theories

We present a simple resolution proof system for higher-order constrained Horn clauses (HoCHC) - a system of higher-order logic modulo theories - and prove its soundness and refutational completeness w.r.t. the standard semantics. As corollaries, we obtain the compactness theorem and semi-decidability of HoCHC for semi-decidable background theories, and we prove that HoCHC satisfies a canonical model property. Moreover a variant of the well-known translation from higher-order to 1st-order logic is shown to be sound and complete for HoCHC in standard semantics. We illustrate how to transfer decidability results for (fragments of) 1st-order logic modulo theories to our higher-order setting, using as example the Bernays-Schonfinkel-Ramsey fragment of HoCHC modulo a restricted form of Linear Integer Arithmetic

SCL with Theory Constraints

We lift the SCL calculus for first-order logic without equality to the SCL(T) calculus for first-order logic without equality modulo a background theory. In a nutshell, the SCL(T) calculus describes a new way to guide hierarchic resolution inferences by a partial model assumption instead of an a priori fixed order as done for instance in hierarchic superposition. The model representation consists of ground background theory literals and ground foreground first-order literals. One major advantage of the model guided approach is that clauses generated by SCL(T) enjoy a non-redundancy property that makes expensive testing for tautologies and forward subsumption completely obsolete. SCL(T) is a semi-decision procedure for pure clause sets that are clause sets without first-order function symbols ranging into the background theory sorts. Moreover, SCL(T) can be turned into a decision procedure if the considered combination of a first-order logic modulo a background theory enjoys an abstract finite model property.Comment: 22 page

{SCL} with Theory Constraints

We lift the SCL calculus for first-order logic without equality to the SCL(T) calculus for first-order logic without equality modulo a background theory. In a nutshell, the SCL(T) calculus describes a new way to guide hierarchic resolution inferences by a partial model assumption instead of an a priori fixed order as done for instance in hierarchic superposition. The model representation consists of ground background theory literals and ground foreground first-order literals. One major advantage of the model guided approach is that clauses generated by SCL(T) enjoy a non-redundancy property that makes expensive testing for tautologies and forward subsumption completely obsolete. SCL(T) is a semi-decision procedure for pure clause sets that are clause sets without first-order function symbols ranging into the background theory sorts. Moreover, SCL(T) can be turned into a decision procedure if the considered combination of a first-order logic modulo a background theory enjoys an abstract finite model property

The Universal Fragment of Presburger Arithmetic with Unary Uninterpreted Predicates is Undecidable

The first-order theory of addition over the natural numbers, known as Presburger arithmetic, is decidable in double exponential time. Adding an uninterpreted unary predicate to the language leads to an undecidable theory. We sharpen the known boundary between decidable and undecidable in that we show that the purely universal fragment of the extended theory is already undecidable. Our proof is based on a reduction of the halting problem for two-counter machines to unsatisfiability of sentences in the extended language of Presburger arithmetic that does not use existential quantification. On the other hand, we argue that a single $\forall\exists$ quantifier alternation turns the set of satisfiable sentences of the extended language into a $\Sigma^1_1$-complete set. Some of the mentioned results can be transfered to the realm of linear arithmetic over the ordered real numbers. This concerns the undecidability of the purely universal fragment and the $\Sigma^1_1$-hardness for sentences with at least one quantifier alternation. Finally, we discuss the relevance of our results to verification. In particular, we derive undecidability results for quantified fragments of separation logic, the theory of arrays, and combinations of the theory of equality over uninterpreted functions with restricted forms of integer arithmetic. In certain cases our results even imply the absence of sound and complete deductive calculi