scholarly journals Integer Induction in Saturation

2021 ◽  
pp. 361-377
Author(s):  
Petra Hozzová ◽  
Laura Kovács ◽  
Andrei Voronkov
Keyword(s):  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Program Analysis ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Inductive Reasoning ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Inference Rules ◽  
First Order ◽  
Theorem Provers ◽  
Mathematical Properties

AbstractIntegers are ubiquitous in programming and therefore also in applications of program analysis and verification. Such applications often require some sort of inductive reasoning. In this paper we analyze the challenge of automating inductive reasoning with integers. We introduce inference rules for integer induction within the saturation framework of first-order theorem proving. We implemented these rules in the theorem prover Vampire and evaluated our work against other state-of-the-art theorem provers. Our results demonstrate the strength of our approach by solving new problems coming from program analysis and mathematical properties of integers.

scholarly journals A Clausal Normal Form Translation for FOOL

10.29007/ltkk ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgenii Kotelnikov ◽  
Laura Kovács ◽  
Martin Suda ◽  
Andrei Voronkov
Keyword(s):  
Normal Form ◽  
Programming Languages ◽  
Program Analysis ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Order Logic ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
First Order Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
Theorem Provers ◽  
Superposition Calculus

Automated theorem provers for first-order logic usually operate on sets of first-order clauses. It is well-known that the translation of a formula in full first-order logic to a clausal normal form (CNF) can crucially affect performance of a theorem prover. In our recent work we introduced a modification of first-order logic extended by the first class boolean sort and syntactical constructs that mirror features of programming languages. We called this logic FOOL. Formulas in FOOL can be translated to ordinary first-order formulas and checked by first-order theorem provers. While this translation is straightforward, it does not result in a CNF that can be efficiently handled by state-of-the-art theorem provers which use superposition calculus. In this paper we present a new CNF translation algorithm for FOOL that is friendly and efficient for superposition-based first-order provers. We implemented the algorithm in the Vampire theorem prover and evaluated it on a large number of problems coming from formalisation of mathematics and program analysis. Our experimental results show an increase of performance of the prover with our CNF translation compared to the naive translation.

scholarly journals Defining the meaning of TPTP formatted proofs

10.29007/xtc2 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Blanco ◽  
Tomer Libal ◽  
Dale Miller
Keyword(s):  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Automated Theorem Proving ◽  
Inference Rules ◽  
First Order ◽  
Theorem Provers

The TPTP library is one of the leading problem libraries in the automated theorem proving community. Along the years, support was added for problems beyond those in first-order clausal form. Another addition was the augmentation of the language to support proofs outputted from theorem provers and the maintenance of a proof library, called TSTP. In this paper we propose another augmentation of the language for the support of the semantics of the inference rules used in these proofs.

scholarly journals Deep Network Guided Proof Search

10.29007/8mwc ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Loos ◽  
Geoffrey Irving ◽  
Christian Szegedy ◽  
Cezary Kaliszyk
Keyword(s):  
Deep Learning ◽  
Program Analysis ◽  
Network Models ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Neural Network Models ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
First Order ◽  
Proof Search ◽  
System Verification ◽  
Theory Reasoning

Deep learning techniques lie at the heart of several significant AI advances in recent years including object recognition and detection, image captioning, machine translation, speech recognition and synthesis, and playing the game of Go.Automated first-order theorem provers can aid in the formalization and verification of mathematical theorems and play a crucial role in program analysis, theory reasoning, security, interpolation, and system verification.Here we suggest deep learning based guidance in the proof search of the theorem prover E. We train and compare several deep neural network models on the traces of existing ATP proofs of Mizar statements and use them to select processed clauses during proof search. We give experimental evidence that with a hybrid, two-phase approach, deep learning based guidance can significantly reduce the average number of proof search steps while increasing the number of theorems proved.Using a few proof guidance strategies that leverage deep neural networks, we have found first-order proofs of 7.36% of the first-order logic translations of the Mizar Mathematical Library theorems that did not previously have ATP generated proofs. This increases the ratio of statements in the corpus with ATP generated proofs from 56% to 59%.

scholarly journals Understanding LEO-II’s proofs

10.29007/x9c9 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nik Sultana ◽  
Christoph Benzmüller
Keyword(s):  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Automated Theorem Proving ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Target Audience ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
First Order

The LEO and LEO-II provers have pioneered the integration of higher-order and first-order automated theorem proving. To date, the LEO-II system is, to our knowledge, the only automated higher-order theorem prover which is capable of generating joint higher-order–first-order proof objects in TPTP format. This paper discusses LEO-II’s proof objects. The target audience are practitioners with an interest in using LEO-II proofs within other systems.

scholarly journals Checkable Proofs for First-Order Theorem Proving

10.29007/s6d1 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles Reger ◽  
Martin Suda
Keyword(s):  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
Boolean Satisfiability ◽  
Order Logic ◽  
First Order Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
Theorem Provers ◽  
Interactive Theorem Provers ◽  
Theory Reasoning

Inspired by the success of the DRAT proof format for certification of boolean satisfiability (SAT),we argue that a similar goal of having unified automatically checkable proofs should be soughtby the developers of automated first-order theorem provers (ATPs). This would not onlyhelp to further increase assurance about the correctness of prover results,but would also be indispensable for tools which rely on ATPs,such as ``hammers'' employed within interactive theorem provers.The current situation, represented by the TSTP format is unsatisfactory,because this format does not have a standardised semantics and thus cannot be checked automatically.Providing such semantics, however, is a challenging endeavour. One would ideallylike to have a proof format which covers only-satisfiability-preserving operations such as Skolemisationand is versatile enough to encompass various proving methods (i.e. not just superposition)or is perhaps even open ended towards yet to be conceived methods or at least easily extendable in principle.Going beyond pure first-order logic to theory reasoning in the style of SMT orbeyond proofs to certification of satisfiability are further interesting challenges.Although several projects have already provided partial solutions in this direction,we would like to use the opportunity of ARCADE to further promote the idea andgather critical mass needed for its satisfactory realisation.

scholarly journals SAT solving experiments in Vampire

10.29007/5l47 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armin Biere ◽  
Ioan Dragan ◽  
Laura Kovács ◽  
Andrei Voronkov
Keyword(s):  
State Of The Art ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Sat Solving ◽  
First Order ◽  
Automated Theorem Prover ◽  
Sat Solver ◽  
Overall Performance

In order to better understand how well a state of the art SAT solver would behave in the framework of a first-order automated theorem prover we have decided to integrate Lingeling, best performing SAT solver, inside Vampire’s AVATAR framework. In this paper we propose two ways of integrating a SAT solver inside of Vampire and evaluate overall performance of this combination. Our experiments show that by using a state of the art SAT solver in Vampire we manage to solve more problems. Surprisingly though, there are cases where combination of the two solvers does not always prove to generate best results.

scholarly journals On Recurrent Neural Network Based Theorem Prover For First Order Minimal Logic

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1193-1202
Author(s):  
Ashot Baghdasaryan ◽  
Hovhannes Bolibekyan
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Neural Networks ◽  
Recurrent Neural Network ◽  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Recurrent Neural Networks ◽  
Selection Problem ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Minimal Logic ◽  
Free System ◽  
First Order

There are three main problems for theorem proving with a standard cut-free system for the first order minimal logic. The first problem is the possibility of looping. Secondly, it might generate proofs which are permutations of each other. Finally, during the proof some choice should be made to decide which rules to apply and where to use them. New systems with history mechanisms were introduced for solving the looping problems of automated theorem provers in the first order minimal logic. In order to solve the rule selection problem, recurrent neural networks are deployed and they are used to determine which formula from the context should be used on further steps. As a result, it yields to the reduction of time during theorem proving.

scholarly journals Making Higher-Order Superposition Work

2021 ◽  
pp. 415-432
Author(s):  
Petar Vukmirović ◽  
Alexander Bentkamp ◽  
Jasmin Blanchette ◽  
Simon Cruanes ◽  
Visa Nummelin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Higher Order ◽  
Order Logic ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
First Order Logic ◽  
Inference Rules ◽  
Higher Order Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
New Challenges

AbstractSuperposition is among the most successful calculi for first-order logic. Its extension to higher-order logic introduces new challenges such as infinitely branching inference rules, new possibilities such as reasoning about formulas, and the need to curb the explosion of specific higher-order rules. We describe techniques that address these issues and extensively evaluate their implementation in the Zipperposition theorem prover. Largely thanks to their use, Zipperposition won the higher-order division of the CASC-J10 competition.

scholarly journals Theory-Specific Reasoning about Loops with Arrays using Vampire

10.29007/qk21 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Chen ◽  
Laura Kovacs ◽  
Simon Robillard
Keyword(s):  
Program Analysis ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Common Theme ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Elimination Method ◽  
First Order ◽  
The Common

We describe new extensions of the first-order theorem prover Vampire for supporting program analysis and proving properties of loops with arrays. The common theme of our work is the symbol elimination method for generating loop invariants. In our work, we improve symbol elimination for program analysis in two ways. First, we enhance the program analysis framework of Vampire by simplifying skolemization during consequence finding. Second, we extend symbol elimination with theory-specific reasoning, in particular in the theory of polymorphic arrays, and generate and prove program properties over arrays. We illustrate our approach on a number of challenging examples coming from program analysis and verification. Our experiments show that, thanks to our improvements, programs that could not be analyzed before can now be verified with our method.

STRATEGY PARALLELISM IN AUTOMATED THEOREM PROVING

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (02) ◽  
pp. 219-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREAS WOLF ◽  
REINHOLD LETZ
Keyword(s):  
Theorem Proving ◽  
Experimental Evaluation ◽  
Automated Theorem Proving ◽  
Search Strategies ◽  
Theorem Prover ◽  
Strategy Selection ◽  
Theorem Provers ◽  
Initial Strategy ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
Run Time

Automated theorem provers use search strategies. Unfortunately, there is no unique strategy which is uniformly successful on all problems. This motivates us to apply different strategies in parallel, in a competitive manner. In this paper, we discuss properties, problems, and perspectives of strategy parallelism in theorem proving. We develop basic concepts like the complementarity and the overlap value of strategy sets. Some of the problems such as initial strategy selection and run-time strategy exchange are discussed in more detail. The paper also contains the description of an implementation of a strategy parallel theorem prover (p-SETHEO) and an experimental evaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document