Instantiation of SMT problems modulo Integers

Many decision procedures for SMT problems rely more or less implicitly on an instantiation of the axioms of the theories under consideration, and differ by making use of the additional properties of each theory, in order to increase efficiency. We present a new technique for devising complete instantiation schemes on SMT problems over a combination of linear arithmetic with another theory T. The method consists in first instantiating the arithmetic part of the formula, and then getting rid of the remaining variables in the problem by using an instantiation strategy which is complete for T. We provide examples evidencing that not only is this technique generic (in the sense that it applies to a wide range of theories) but it is also efficient, even compared to state-of-the-art instantiation schemes for specific theories.Comment: Research report, long version of our AISC 2010 pape

A Calculus for Generating Ground Explanations

Full Paper: Applications II: Mathematical Structures, Explanation Generation, SecurityInternational audienceWe present a modification of the superposition calculus that is meant to generate explanations why a set of clauses is satisfiable. This process is related to abductive reasoning, and the explanations generated are clauses constructed over so-called abductive constants. We prove the correctness and completeness of the calculus in the presence of redundancy elimination rules, and develop a sufficient condition guaranteeing its termination; this sufficient condition is then used to prove that all possible explanations can be generated in finite time for several classes of clause sets, including many of interest to the SMT community. We propose a procedure that generates a set of explanations that should be useful to a human user and conclude by suggesting several extensions to this novel approach

Theory Combination: Beyond Equality Sharing

International audienceSatisfiability is the problem of deciding whether a formula has a model. Although it is not even semidecidable in first-order logic, it is decidable in some first-order theories or fragments thereof (e.g., the quantifier-free fragment). Satisfiability modulo a theory is the problem of determining whether a quantifier-free formula admits a model that is a model of a given theory. If the formula mixes theories, the considered theory is their union, and combination of theories is the problem of combining decision procedures for the individual theories to get one for their union. A standard solution is the equality-sharing method by Nelson and Oppen, which requires the theories to be disjoint and stably infinite. This paper surveys selected approaches to the problem of reasoning in the union of disjoint theories, that aim at going beyond equality sharing, including: asymmetric extensions of equality sharing, where some theories are unrestricted, while others must satisfy stronger requirements than stable infiniteness; superposition-based decision procedures; and current work on conflict-driven satisfiability (CDSAT)

Pseudo-contractions as Gentle Repairs

Updating a knowledge base to remove an unwanted consequence is a challenging task. Some of the original sentences must be either deleted or weakened in such a way that the sentence to be removed is no longer entailed by the resulting set. On the other hand, it is desirable that the existing knowledge be preserved as much as possible, minimising the loss of information. Several approaches to this problem can be found in the literature. In particular, when the knowledge is represented by an ontology, two different families of frameworks have been developed in the literature in the past decades with numerous ideas in common but with little interaction between the communities: applications of AGM-like Belief Change and justification-based Ontology Repair. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between pseudo-contraction operations and gentle repairs. Both aim to avoid the complete deletion of sentences when replacing them with weaker versions is enough to prevent the entailment of the unwanted formula. We show the correspondence between concepts on both sides and investigate under which conditions they are equivalent. Furthermore, we propose a unified notation for the two approaches, which might contribute to the integration of the two areas

Superposition modulo theory

This thesis is about the Hierarchic Superposition calculus SUP(T) and its application to reasoning in hierarchic combinations FOL(T) of the free first-order logic FOL with a background theory T where the hierarchic calculus is refutationally complete or serves as a decision procedure. Particular hierarchic combinations covered in the thesis are the combinations of FOL and linear and non-linear arithmetic, LA and NLA resp. Recent progress in automated reasoning has greatly encouraged numerous applications in soft- and hardware verification and the analysis of complex systems. The applications typically require to determine the validity/unsatisfiability of quantified formulae over the combination of the free first-order logic with some background theories. The hierarchic superposition leverages both (i) the reasoning in FOL equational clauses with universally quantified variables, like the standard superposition does, and (ii) powerful reasoning techniques in such theories as, e.g., arithmetic, which are usually not (finitely) axiomatizable by FOL formulae, like modern SMT solvers do. The thesis significantly extends previous results on SUP(T), particularly: we introduce new substantially more effective sufficient completeness and hierarchic redundancy criteria turning SUP(T) to a complete or a decision procedure for various FOL(T) fragments; instantiate and refine SUP(T) to effectively support particular combinations of FOL with the LA and NLA theories enabling a fully automatic mechanism of reasoning about systems formalized in FOL(LA) or FOL(NLA).Diese Arbeit befasst sich mit dem hierarchischen Superpositionskalkül SUP(T) und seiner Anwendung auf hierarchischen Kombinationen FOL(T) der freien Logik erste Stufe FOL und einer Hintergrundtheorie T, deren hierarchischer Kalkül widerlegungsvollständig ist oder als Entscheidungsverfahren dient. Die behandelten hierarchischen Kombinationen sind im Besonderen die Kombinationen von FOL und linearer und nichtlinearer Arithmetik, LA bzw. NLA. Die jüngsten Fortschritte in dem Bereich des automatisierten Beweisens haben zahlreiche Anwendungen in der Soft- und Hardwareverifikation und der Analyse komplexer Systeme hervorgebracht. Die Anwendungen erfordern typischerweise die Gültigkeit/Unerfüllbarkeit quantifizierter Formeln über Kombinationen der freien Logik erste Stufe mit Hintergrundtheorien zu bestimmen. Die hierarchische Superposition verbindet beides: (i) das Beweisen über FOL-Klauseln mit Gleichheit und allquantifizierten Variablen, wie in der Standardsuperposition, und (ii) mächtige Beweistechniken in Theorien, die üblicherweise nicht (endlich) axiomatisierbar durch FOL-Formeln sind (z. B. Arithmetik), wie in modernen SMT-Solvern. Diese Arbeit erweitert frühere Ergebnisse über SUP(T) signifikant, im Besonderen führen wir substantiell effektiverer Kriterien zur Bestimmung der hinreichenden Vollständigkeit und der hierarchischen Redundanz ein. Mit diesen Kriterien wird SUP(T) widerlegungsvollständig beziehungsweise ein Entscheidungsverfahren für verschiedene FOL(T)-Fragmente. Weiterhin instantiieren und verfeinern wir SUP(T), um effektiv die Kombinationen von FOL mit der LA- und der NLA-Theorie zu unterstützen, und erhalten eine vollautomatische Beweisprozedur auf Systemen, die in FOL(LA) oder FOL(NLA) formalisiert werden können

Theory decision by decomposition

The topic of this article is decision procedures for satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) of arbitrary quantifier-free formulæ. We propose an approach that decomposes the formula in such a way that its definitional part, including the theory, can be compiled by a rewrite-based firstorder theorem prover, and the residual problem can be decided by an SMT-solver, based on the Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland procedure. The resulting decision by stages mechanism may unite the complementary strengths of first-order provers and SMT-solvers. We demonstrate its practicality by giving decision procedures for the theories of records, integer offsets and arrays, with or without extensionality, and for combinations including such theories