A Vernacular for Coherent Logic

We propose a simple, yet expressive proof representation from which proofs for different proof assistants can easily be generated. The representation uses only a few inference rules and is based on a frag- ment of first-order logic called coherent logic. Coherent logic has been recognized by a number of researchers as a suitable logic for many ev- eryday mathematical developments. The proposed proof representation is accompanied by a corresponding XML format and by a suite of XSL transformations for generating formal proofs for Isabelle/Isar and Coq, as well as proofs expressed in a natural language form (formatted in LATEX or in HTML). Also, our automated theorem prover for coherent logic exports proofs in the proposed XML format. All tools are publicly available, along with a set of sample theorems.Comment: CICM 2014 - Conferences on Intelligent Computer Mathematics (2014

Extending SMTCoq, a Certified Checker for SMT (Extended Abstract)

This extended abstract reports on current progress of SMTCoq, a communication tool between the Coq proof assistant and external SAT and SMT solvers. Based on a checker for generic first-order certificates implemented and proved correct in Coq, SMTCoq offers facilities both to check external SAT and SMT answers and to improve Coq's automation using such solvers, in a safe way. Currently supporting the SAT solver zChaff, and the SMT solver veriT for the combination of the theories of congruence closure and linear integer arithmetic, SMTCoq is meant to be extendable with a reasonable amount of effort: we present work in progress to support the SMT solver CVC4 and the theory of bit vectors.Comment: In Proceedings HaTT 2016, arXiv:1606.0542

Third international workshop on proof exchange for theorem proving, pxtp 2013, lake placid, ny, USA, june 9-10, 2013

Item does not contain fulltext132 p

Formalization and automation of Euclidean geometry

Напредак геометрије кроз векове се може разматрати кроз развој различитих аксиоматских система који је описују. Употреба аксиоматских система започиње са Хилбертом и Тарским али се ту не завршава. Чак и данас се развијају нови аксиоматски ситеми за рад са еуклидском геометријом...The advance of geometry over the centuries can be observed through the development of dierent axiomatic systems that describe it. The use of axiomatic systems begins with Euclid, continues with Hilbert and Tarski, but it doesn't end there. Even today, new axiomatic systems for Euclidean geometry are developed..

Mécanismes Orientés-Objets pour l'Interopérabilité entre Systèmes de Preuve

Dedukti is a Logical Framework resulting from the combination ofdependent typing and rewriting. It can be used to encode many logicalsystems using shallow embeddings preserving their notion of reduction.These translations of logical systems in a common format are anecessary first step for exchanging proofs between systems. Thisobjective of interoperability of proof systems is the main motivationof this thesis.To achieve it, we take inspiration from the world of programminglanguages and more specifically from object-oriented languages becausethey feature advanced mechanisms for encapsulation, modularity, anddefault definitions. For this reason we start by a shallowtranslation of an object calculus to Dedukti. The most interestingpoint in this translation is the treatment of subtyping.Unfortunately, it seems very hard to incorporate logic in this objectcalculus. To proceed, object-oriented mechanisms should be restrictedto static ones which seem enough for interoperability. Such acombination of static object-oriented mechanisms and logic is alreadypresent in the FoCaLiZe environment so we propose a shallow embeddingof FoCaLiZe in Dedukti. The main difficulties arise from theintegration of FoCaLiZe automatic theorem prover Zenon and from thetranslation of FoCaLiZe functional implementation language featuringtwo constructs which have no simple counterparts in Dedukti: localpattern matching and recursion.We then demonstrate how this embedding of FoCaLiZe to Dedukti can beused in practice for achieving interoperability of proof systemsthrough FoCaLiZe, Zenon, and Dedukti. In order to avoid strengtheningto much the theory in which the final proof is expressed, we useDedukti as a meta-language for eliminating unnecessary axioms.Dedukti est un cadre logique résultant de la combinaison du typagedépendant et de la réécriture. Il permet d'encoder de nombreuxsystèmes logiques au moyen de plongements superficiels qui préserventla notion de réduction.Ces traductions de systèmes logiques dans un format commun sont unepremière étape nécessaire à l'échange de preuves entre cessystèmes. Cet objectif d'interopérabilité des systèmes de preuve estla motivation principale de cette thèse.Pour y parvenir, nous nous inspirons du monde des langages deprogrammation et plus particulièrement des langages orientés-objetparce qu'ils mettent en œuvre des mécanismes avancés d'encapsulation,de modularité et de définitions par défaut. Pour cette raison, nouscommençons par une traduction superficielle d'un calcul orienté-objeten Dedukti. L'aspect le plus intéressant de cette traduction est letraitement du sous-typage.Malheureusement, ce calcul orienté-objet ne semble pas adapté àl'incorporation de traits logiques. Afin de continuer, nous devonsrestreindre les mécanismes orientés-objet à des mécanismes statiques,plus faciles à combiner avec la logique et apparemment suffisant pournotre objectif d'interopérabilité. Une telle combinaison de mécanismesorientés-objet et de logique est présente dans l'environnementFoCaLiZe donc nous proposons un encodage superficiel de FoCaLiZe dansDedukti. Les difficultés principales proviennent de l'intégration deZenon, le prouveur automatique de théorèmes sur lequel FoCaLiZerepose, et de la traduction du langage d'implantation fonctionnel deFoCaLiZe qui présente deux constructions qui n'ont pas decorrespondance simple en Dedukti : le filtrage de motif local et larécursivité.Nous démontrons finalement comment notre encodage de FoCaLiZe dansDedukti peut servir en pratique à l'interopérabilité entre dessystèmes de preuve à l'aide de FoCaLiZe, Zenon et Dedukti. Pour éviterde trop renforcer la théorie dans laquelle la preuve finale estobtenue, nous proposons d'utiliser Dedukti en tant que méta-langagepour éliminer des axiomes superflus

On a notion of abduction and relevance for first-order logic clause sets

I propose techniques to help with explaining entailment and non-entailment in first-order logic respectively relying on deductive and abductive reasoning. First, given an unsatisfiable clause set, one could ask which clauses are necessary for any possible deduction (\emph{syntactically relevant}), usable for some deduction (\emph{syntactically semi-relevant}), or unusable (\emph{syntactically irrelevant}). I propose a first-order formalization of this notion and demonstrate a lifting of this notion to the explanation of an entailment w.r.t some axiom set defined in some description logic fragments. Moreover, it is accompanied by a semantic characterization via \emph{conflict literals} (contradictory simple facts). From an unsatisfiable clause set, a pair of conflict literals are always deducible. A \emph{relevant} clause is necessary to derive any conflict literal, a \emph{semi-relevant} clause is necessary to derive some conflict literal, and an \emph{irrelevant} clause is not useful in deriving any conflict literals. It helps provide a picture of why an explanation holds beyond what one can get from the predominant notion of a minimal unsatisfiable set. The need to test if a clause is (syntactically) semi-relevant leads to a generalization of a well-known resolution strategy: resolution equipped with the set-of-support strategy is refutationally complete on a clause set $N$ and SOS $M$ if and only if there is a resolution refutation from $N\cup M$ using a clause in $M$. This result non-trivially improves the original formulation. Second, abductive reasoning helps find extensions of a knowledge base to obtain an entailment of some missing consequence (called observation). Not only that it is useful to repair incomplete knowledge bases but also to explain a possibly unexpected observation. I particularly focus on TBox abduction in \EL description logic (still first-order logic fragment via some model-preserving translation scheme) which is rather lightweight but prevalent in practice. The solution space can be huge or even infinite. So, different kinds of minimality notions can help sort the chaff from the grain. I argue that existing ones are insufficient, and introduce \emph{connection minimality}. This criterion offers an interpretation of Occam's razor in which hypotheses are accepted only when they help acquire the entailment without arbitrarily using axioms unrelated to the problem at hand. In addition, I provide a first-order technique to compute the connection-minimal hypotheses in a sound and complete way. The key technique relies on prime implicates. While the negation of a single prime implicate can already serve as a first-order hypothesis, a connection-minimal hypothesis which follows \EL syntactic restrictions (a set of simple concept inclusions) would require a combination of them. Termination by bounding the term depth in the prime implicates is provable by only looking into the ones that are also subset-minimal. I also present an evaluation on ontologies from the medical domain by implementing a prototype with SPASS as a prime implicate generation engine.Ich schlage Techniken vor, die bei der Erklärung von Folgerung und Nichtfolgerung in der Logik erster Ordnung helfen, die sich jeweils auf deduktives und abduktives Denken stützen. Erstens könnte man bei einer gegebenen unerfüllbaren Klauselmenge fragen, welche Klauseln für eine mögliche Deduktion notwendig (\emph{syntaktisch relevant}), für eine Deduktion verwendbar (\emph{syntaktisch semi-relevant}) oder unbrauchbar (\emph{syntaktisch irrelevant}). Ich schlage eine Formalisierung erster Ordnung dieses Begriffs vor und demonstriere eine Anhebung dieses Begriffs auf die Erklärung einer Folgerung bezüglich einer Reihe von Axiomen, die in einigen Beschreibungslogikfragmenten definiert sind. Außerdem wird sie von einer semantischen Charakterisierung durch \emph{Konfliktliteral} (widersprüchliche einfache Fakten) begleitet. Aus einer unerfüllbaren Klauselmenge ist immer ein Konfliktliteralpaar ableitbar. Eine \emph{relevant}-Klausel ist notwendig, um ein Konfliktliteral abzuleiten, eine \emph{semi-relevant}-Klausel ist notwendig, um ein Konfliktliteral zu generieren, und eine \emph{irrelevant}-Klausel ist nicht nützlich, um Konfliktliterale zu generieren. Es hilft, ein Bild davon zu vermitteln, warum eine Erklärung über das hinausgeht, was man aus der vorherrschenden Vorstellung einer minimalen unerfüllbaren Menge erhalten kann. Die Notwendigkeit zu testen, ob eine Klausel (syntaktisch) semi-relevant ist, führt zu einer Verallgemeinerung einer bekannten Resolutionsstrategie: Die mit der Set-of-Support-Strategie ausgestattete Resolution ist auf einer Klauselmenge $N$ und SOS $M$ widerlegungsvollständig, genau dann wenn es eine Auflösungswiderlegung von $N\cup M$ unter Verwendung einer Klausel in $M$ gibt. Dieses Ergebnis verbessert die ursprüngliche Formulierung nicht trivial. Zweitens hilft abduktives Denken dabei, Erweiterungen einer Wissensbasis zu finden, um eine implikantion einer fehlenden Konsequenz (Beobachtung genannt) zu erhalten. Es ist nicht nur nützlich, unvollständige Wissensbasen zu reparieren, sondern auch, um eine möglicherweise unerwartete Beobachtung zu erklären. Ich konzentriere mich besonders auf die TBox-Abduktion in dem leichten, aber praktisch vorherrschenden Fragment der Beschreibungslogik \EL, das tatsächlich ein Logikfragment erster Ordnung ist (mittels eines modellerhaltenden Übersetzungsschemas). Der Lösungsraum kann riesig oder sogar unendlich sein. So können verschiedene Arten von Minimalitätsvorstellungen helfen, die Spreu vom Weizen zu trennen. Ich behaupte, dass die bestehenden unzureichend sind, und führe \emph{Verbindungsminimalität} ein. Dieses Kriterium bietet eine Interpretation von Ockhams Rasiermesser, bei der Hypothesen nur dann akzeptiert werden, wenn sie helfen, die Konsequenz zu erlangen, ohne willkürliche Axiome zu verwenden, die nichts mit dem vorliegenden Problem zu tun haben. Außerdem stelle ich eine Technik in Logik erster Ordnung zur Berechnung der verbindungsminimalen Hypothesen in zur Verfügung korrekte und vollständige Weise. Die Schlüsseltechnik beruht auf Primimplikanten. Während die Negation eines einzelnen Primimplikant bereits als Hypothese in Logik erster Ordnung dienen kann, würde eine Hypothese des Verbindungsminimums, die den syntaktischen Einschränkungen von \EL folgt (einer Menge einfacher Konzeptinklusionen), eine Kombination dieser beiden erfordern. Die Terminierung durch Begrenzung der Termtiefe in den Primimplikanten ist beweisbar, indem nur diejenigen betrachtet werden, die auch teilmengenminimal sind. Außerdem stelle ich eine Auswertung zu Ontologien aus der Medizin vor, Domäne durch die Implementierung eines Prototyps mit SPASS als Primimplikant-Generierungs-Engine

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

This open access book constitutes the proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS 2022, which was held during April 2-7, 2022, in Munich, Germany, as part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2022. The 46 full papers and 4 short papers presented in this volume were carefully reviewed and selected from 159 submissions. The proceedings also contain 16 tool papers of the affiliated competition SV-Comp and 1 paper consisting of the competition report. TACAS is a forum for researchers, developers, and users interested in rigorously based tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems. The conference aims to bridge the gaps between different communities with this common interest and to support them in their quest to improve the utility, reliability, exibility, and efficiency of tools and algorithms for building computer-controlled systems

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

This open access book constitutes the proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS 2022, which was held during April 2-7, 2022, in Munich, Germany, as part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2022. The 46 full papers and 4 short papers presented in this volume were carefully reviewed and selected from 159 submissions. The proceedings also contain 16 tool papers of the affiliated competition SV-Comp and 1 paper consisting of the competition report. TACAS is a forum for researchers, developers, and users interested in rigorously based tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems. The conference aims to bridge the gaps between different communities with this common interest and to support them in their quest to improve the utility, reliability, exibility, and efficiency of tools and algorithms for building computer-controlled systems