On the Expressivity and Applicability of Model Representation Formalisms

A number of first-order calculi employ an explicit model representation formalism for automated reasoning and for detecting satisfiability. Many of these formalisms can represent infinite Herbrand models. The first-order fragment of monadic, shallow, linear, Horn (MSLH) clauses, is such a formalism used in the approximation refinement calculus. Our first result is a finite model property for MSLH clause sets. Therefore, MSLH clause sets cannot represent models of clause sets with inherently infinite models. Through a translation to tree automata, we further show that this limitation also applies to the linear fragments of implicit generalizations, which is the formalism used in the model-evolution calculus, to atoms with disequality constraints, the formalisms used in the non-redundant clause learning calculus (NRCL), and to atoms with membership constraints, a formalism used for example in decision procedures for algebraic data types. Although these formalisms cannot represent models of clause sets with inherently infinite models, through an additional approximation step they can. This is our second main result. For clause sets including the definition of an equivalence relation with the help of an additional, novel approximation, called reflexive relation splitting, the approximation refinement calculus can automatically show satisfiability through the MSLH clause set formalism

Decidability Results for Saturation-based Model Building

Saturation-based calculi such as superposition can be successfully instantiated to decision procedures for many decidable fragments of first-order logic. In case of termination without generating an empty clause, a saturated clause set implicitly represents a minimal model for all clauses, based on the underlying term ordering of the superposition calculus. In general, it is not decidable whether a ground atom, a clause or even a formula holds in this minimal model of a satisfiable saturated clause set. Based on an extension of our superposition calculus for fixed domains with syntactic disequality constraints in a non-equational setting, we describe models given by ARM (Atomic Representations of term Models) or DIG (Disjunctions of Implicit Generalizations) representations as minimal models of finite saturated clause sets. This allows us to present several new decidability results for validity in such models. These results extend in particular the known decidability results for ARM and DIG representations

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

{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

An Efficient Subsumption Test Pipeline for {BS(LRA)} Clauses

International audienceThe importance of subsumption testing for redundancy elimination in first-order logic automatic reasoning is well-known. Although the problem is already NP-complete for first-order clauses, the meanwhile developed test pipelines efficiently decide subsumption in almost all practical cases. We consider subsumption between first-oder clauses of the Bernays-Schönfinkel fragment over linear real arithmetic constraints: BS(LRA). The bottleneck in this setup is deciding implication between the LRA constraints of two clauses. Our new sample point heuristic preempts expensive implication decisions in about 94% of all cases in benchmarks. Combined with filtering techniques for the first-order BS part of clauses, it results again in an efficient subsumption test pipeline for BS(LRA) clauses

Linear Integer Arithmetic Revisited

We consider feasibility of linear integer programs in the context of verification systems such as SMT solvers or theorem provers. Although satisfiability of linear integer programs is decidable, many state-of-the-art solvers neglect termination in favor of efficiency. It is challenging to design a solver that is both terminating and practically efficient. Recent work by Jovanovic and de Moura constitutes an important step into this direction. Their algorithm CUTSAT is sound, but does not terminate, in general. In this paper we extend their CUTSAT algorithm by refined inference rules, a new type of conflicting core, and a dedicated rule application strategy. This leads to our algorithm CUTSAT++, which guarantees termination

On the saturation of YAGO

YAGO is an automatically generated ontology out of Wikipedia and WordNet. It is eventually represented in a proprietary flat text file format and a core comprises 10 million facts and formulas. We present a translation of YAGO into the Bernays-Sch¨onfinkel Horn class with equality. A new variant of the superposition calculus is sound, complete and terminating for this class. Together with extended term indexing data structures the new calculus is implemented in Spass-YAGO. YAGO can be finitely saturated by Spass-YAGO in about 1 hour.We have found 49 inconsistencies in the original generated ontology which we have fixed. Spass-YAGO can then prove non-trivial conjectures with respect to the resulting saturated and consistent clause set of about 1.4 GB in less than one second