Emerging trends proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics: TPHOLs 2004

technical reportThis volume constitutes the proceedings of the Emerging Trends track of the 17th International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (TPHOLs 2004) held September 14-17, 2004 in Park City, Utah, USA. The TPHOLs conference covers all aspects of theorem proving in higher order logics as well as related topics in theorem proving and verification. There were 42 papers submitted to TPHOLs 2004 in the full research cate- gory, each of which was refereed by at least 3 reviewers selected by the program committee. Of these submissions, 21 were accepted for presentation at the con- ference and publication in volume 3223 of Springer?s Lecture Notes in Computer Science series. In keeping with longstanding tradition, TPHOLs 2004 also offered a venue for the presentation of work in progress, where researchers invite discussion by means of a brief introductory talk and then discuss their work at a poster session. The work-in-progress papers are held in this volume, which is published as a 2004 technical report of the School of Computing at the University of Utah

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

Repenser la bibliothèque réelle de Coq : vers une formalisation de l'analyse classique mieux adaptée

Real analysis is pervasive to many applications, if only because it is a suitable tool for modeling physical or socio-economical systems. As such, its support is warranted in proof assistants, so that the users have a way to formally verify mathematical theorems and correctness of critical systems. The Coq system comes with an axiomatization of standard real numbers and a library of theorems on real analysis. Unfortunately, this standard library is lacking some widely used results. For instance, the definitions of integrals and derivatives are based on dependent types, which make them cumbersome to use in practice. This thesis first describes various state-of-the-art libraries available in proof assistants. To palliate the inadequacies of the Coq standard library, we have designed a user-friendly formalization of real analysis: Coquelicot. An easier way of writing formulas and theorem statements is achieved by relying on total functions in place of dependent types for limits, derivatives, integrals, power series, and so on. To help with the proof process, the library comes with a comprehensive set of theorems that cover not only these notions, but also some extensions such as parametric integrals and asymptotic behaviors. Moreover, an algebraic hierarchy makes it possible to apply some of the theorems in a more generic setting, such as complex numbers or matrices. Coquelicot is a conservative extension of the classical analysis of Coq's standard library and we provide correspondence theorems between the two formalizations. We have exercised the library on several use cases: in an exam at university entry level, for the definitions and properties of Bessel functions, and for the solution of the one-dimensional wave equation.L'analyse réelle a de nombreuses applications car c'est un outil approprié pour modéliser de nombreux phénomènes physiques et socio-économiques. En tant que tel, sa formalisation dans des systèmes de preuve formelle est justifié pour permettre aux utilisateurs de vérifier formellement des théorèmes mathématiques et l'exactitude de systèmes critiques. La bibliothèque standard de Coq dispose d'une axiomatisation des nombres réels et d'une bibliothèque de théorèmes d'analyse réelle. Malheureusement, cette bibliothèque souffre de nombreuses lacunes. Par exemple, les définitions des intégrales et des dérivées sont basées sur les types dépendants, ce qui les rend difficiles à utiliser dans la pratique. Cette thèse décrit d'abord l'état de l'art des différentes bibliothèques d'analyse réelle disponibles dans les assistants de preuve. Pour pallier les insuffisances de la bibliothèque standard de Coq, nous avons conçu une bibliothèque facile à utiliser : Coquelicot. Une façon plus facile d'écrire les formules et les théorèmes a été mise en place en utilisant des fonctions totales à la place des types dépendants pour écrire les limites, dérivées, intégrales et séries entières. Pour faciliter l'utilisation, la bibliothèque dispose d'un ensemble complet de théorèmes couvrant ces notions, mais aussi quelques extensions comme les intégrales à paramètres et les comportements asymptotiques. En plus, une hiérarchie algébrique permet d'appliquer certains théorèmes dans un cadre plus générique comme les nombres complexes pour les matrices. Coquelicot est une extension conservative de l'analyse classique de la bibliothèque standard de Coq et nous avons démontré les théorèmes de correspondance entre les deux formalisations. Nous avons testé la bibliothèque sur plusieurs cas d'utilisation : sur une épreuve du Baccalauréat, pour les définitions et les propriétés des fonctions de Bessel ainsi que pour la solution de l'équation des ondes en dimension 1

Verifying Programs with Logic and Extended Proof Rules: Deep Embedding v.s. Shallow Embedding

Many foundational program verification tools have been developed to build machine-checked program correctness proofs, a majority of which are based on Hoare logic. Their program logics, their assertion languages, and their underlying programming languages can be formalized by either a shallow embedding or a deep embedding. Tools like Iris and early versions of Verified Software Toolchain (VST) choose different shallow embeddings to formalize their program logics. But the pros and cons of these different embeddings were not yet well studied. Therefore, we want to study the impact of the program logic's embedding on logic's proof rules in this paper. This paper considers a set of useful extended proof rules, and four different logic embeddings: one deep embedding and three common shallow embeddings. We prove the validity of these extended rules under these embeddings and discuss their main challenges. Furthermore, we propose a method to lift existing shallowly embedded logics to deeply embedded ones to greatly simplify proofs of extended rules in specific proof systems. We evaluate our results on two existing verification tools. We lift the originally shallowly embedded VST to our deeply embedded VST to support extended rules, and we implement Iris-CF and deeply embedded Iris-Imp based on the Iris framework to evaluate our theory in real verification projects

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