اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدA First Class Boolean Sort in First-Order Theorem Proving and TPTP
90
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
To support reasoning about properties of programs operating with boolean values one needs theorem provers to be able to natively deal with the boolean sort. This way, program properties can be translated to first-order logic and theorem provers can be used to prove program properties efficiently. However, in the TPTP language, the input language of automated first-order theorem provers, the use of the boolean sort is limited compared to other sorts, thus hindering the use of first-order theorem provers in program analysis and verification. In this paper, we present an extension FOOL of many-sorted first-order logic, in which the boolean sort is treated as a first-class sort. Boolean terms are indistinguishable from formulas and can appear as arguments to functions. In addition, FOOL contains if-then-else and let-in constructs. We define the syntax and semantics of FOOL and its model-preserving translation to first-order logic. We also introduce a new technique of dealing with boolean sorts in superposition-based theorem provers. Finally, we discuss how the TPTP language can be changed to support FOOL.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Motivated by applications of first-order theorem proving to software analysis, we introduce a new inference rule, called subsumption demodulation, to improve support for reasoning with conditional equalities in superposition-based theorem proving. We
show that subsumption demodulation is a simplification rule that does not require radical changes to the underlying superposition calculus. We implemented subsumption demodulation in the theorem prover Vampire, by extending Vampire with a new clause index and adapting its multi-literal matching component. Our experiments, using the TPTP and SMT-LIB repositories, show that subsumption demodulation in Vampire can solve many new problems that could so far not be solved by state-of-the-art reasoners.
Automated theorem provers have traditionally relied on manually tuned heuristics to guide how they perform proof search. Deep reinforcement learning has been proposed as a way to obviate the need for such heuristics, however, its deployment in automa
ted theorem proving remains a challenge. In this paper we introduce TRAIL, a system that applies deep reinforcement learning to saturation-based theorem proving. TRAIL leverages (a) a novel neural representation of the state of a theorem prover and (b) a novel characterization of the inference selection process in terms of an attention-based action policy. We show through systematic analysis that these mechanisms allow TRAIL to significantly outperform previous reinforcement-learning-based theorem provers on two benchmark datasets for first-order logic automated theorem proving (proving around 15% more theorems).
Automated theorem proving in first-order logic is an active research area which is successfully supported by machine learning. While there have been various proposals for encoding logical formulas into numerical vectors -- from simple strings to more
involved graph-based embeddings -- little is known about how these different encodings compare. In this paper, we study and experimentally compare pattern-based embeddings that are applied in current systems with popular graph-based encodings, most of which have not been considered in the theorem proving context before. Our experiments show that the advantages of simpler encoding schemes in terms of runtime are outdone by more complex graph-based embeddings, which yield more efficient search strategies and simpler proofs. To support this, we present a detailed analysis across several dimensions of theorem prover performance beyond just proof completion rate, thus providing empirical evidence to help guide future research on neural-guided theorem proving towards the most promising directions.
Existing work on theorem proving for the assertion language of separation logic (SL) either focuses on abstract semantics which are not readily available in most applications of program verification, or on concrete models for which completeness is no
t possible. An important element in concrete SL is the points-to predicate which denotes a singleton heap. SL with the points-to predicate has been shown to be non-recursively enumerable. In this paper, we develop a first-order SL, called FOASL, with an abstracted version of the points-to predicate. We prove that FOASL is sound and complete with respect to an abstract semantics, of which the standard SL semantics is an instance. We also show that some reasoning principles involving the points-to predicate can be approximated as FOASL theories, thus allowing our logic to be used for reasoning about concrete program verification problems. We give some example theories that are sound with respect to different variants of separation logics from the literature, including those that are incompatible with Reynoldss semantics. In the experiment we demonstrate our FOASL based theorem prover which is able to handle a large fragment of separation logic with heap semantics as well as non-standard semantics.
A genoid is a category of two objects such that one is the product of itself with the other. A genoid may be viewed as an abstract substitution algebra. It is a remarkable fact that such a simple concept can be applied to present a unified algebraic approach to lambda calculus and first order logic.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
