Results 1 - 10
of
18
Integrating decision procedures into heuristic theorem provers: A case study of linear arithmetic
- Machine Intelligence
, 1988
"... We discuss the problem of incorporating into a heuristic theorem prover a decision procedure for a fragment of the logic. An obvious goal when incorporating such a procedure is to reduce the search space explored by the heuristic component of the system, as would be achieved by eliminating from the ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 104 (9 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We discuss the problem of incorporating into a heuristic theorem prover a decision procedure for a fragment of the logic. An obvious goal when incorporating such a procedure is to reduce the search space explored by the heuristic component of the system, as would be achieved by eliminating from the system’s data base some explicitly stated axioms. For example, if a decision procedure for linear inequalities is added, one would hope to eliminate the explicit consideration of the transitivity axioms. However, the decision procedure must then be used in all the ways the eliminated axioms might have been. The difficulty of achieving this degree of integration is more dependent upon the complexity of the heuristic component than upon that of the decision procedure. The view of the decision procedure as a "black box " is frequently destroyed by the need pass large amounts of search strategic information back and forth between the two components. Finally, the efficiency of the decision procedure may be virtually irrelevant; the efficiency of the final system may depend most heavily on how easy it is to communicate between the two components. This paper is a case study of how we integrated a linear arithmetic procedure into a heuristic theorem prover. By linear arithmetic here we mean the decidable subset of number theory dealing with universally quantified formulas composed of the logical connectives, the identity relation, the Peano "less than " relation, the Peano addition and subtraction functions, Peano constants,
Reasoning Theories - Towards an Architecture for Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems
, 1994
"... : Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems might be ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 47 (11 self)
- Add to MetaCart
: Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems might be based on different logics; have different domain models; use different vocabularies and data structures; use different reasoning strategies; and have different interaction capabilities. This paper makes two main contributions towards our goal. First, it proposes a general architecture for a class of reasoning systems called Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems (OMRSs). An OMRS has three components: a reasoning theory component which is the counterpart of the logical notion of formal system, a control component which consists of a set of inference strategies, and an interaction component which provides an OMRS with the capability of interacting with other systems, including OMRSs and hum...
A Mechanically Verified Language Implementation
- Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1989
"... contained in this document are those of the author and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of Computational Logic, Inc., the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or the U.S. Government. This paper briefly describes a programming language ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 46 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
contained in this document are those of the author and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of Computational Logic, Inc., the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or the U.S. Government. This paper briefly describes a programming language, its implementation on a microprocessor via a compiler and link-assembler, and the mechanically checked proof of the correctness of the implementation. The programming language, called Piton, is a high-level assembly language designed for verified applications and as the target language for high-level language compilers. It provides execute-only programs, recursive subroutine call and return, stack based parameter passing, local variables, global variables and arrays, a user-visible stack for intermediate results, and seven abstract data types including integers, data addresses, program addresses and subroutine names. Piton is formally specified by an interpreter written for it in the computational logic of Boyer and Moore. Piton has been implemented on the FM8502, a general purpose microprocessor whose gate-level design has been mechanically proved to implement its machine code interpreter. The FM8502 implementation of Piton is via a function in the Boyer-Moore logic which maps a Piton initial state into an FM8502 binary core image. The compiler and link-assembler are all defined as functions in the logic. The implementation requires approximately 36K bytes and 1,400 lines of prettyprinted source code in the Pure Lisp-like syntax of the logic. The implementation has been mechanically proved correct. In particular, if a Piton state can be run to completion without error, then the final values of all the global data structures can be ascertained from an inspection of an FM8502 core image obtained by running the core image produced by the compiler and link-assembler. Thus, verified Piton programs running on FM8502 can be thought of as having been verified down to the gate level. 1.
The Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover and Its Interactive Enhancement
, 1995
"... . The so-called "Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover" (otherwise known as "Nqthm") has been used to perform a variety of verification tasks for two decades. We give an overview of both this system and an interactive enhancement of it, "Pc-Nqthm," from a number of perspectives. First we introduce the logic in ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 27 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
. The so-called "Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover" (otherwise known as "Nqthm") has been used to perform a variety of verification tasks for two decades. We give an overview of both this system and an interactive enhancement of it, "Pc-Nqthm," from a number of perspectives. First we introduce the logic in which theorems are proved. Then we briefly describe the two mechanized theorem proving systems. Next, we present a simple but illustrative example in some detail in order to give an impression of how these systems may be used successfully. Finally, we give extremely short descriptions of a large number of applications of these systems, in order to give an idea of the breadth of their uses. This paper is intended as an informal introduction to systems that have been described in detail and similarly summarized in many other books and papers; no new results are reported here. Our intention here is merely to present Nqthm to a new audience. This research was supported in part by ONR Contract N...
MJRTY - A Fast Majority Vote Algorithm
, 1982
"... A new algorithm is presented for determining which, if any, of an arbitrary number of candidates has received a majority of the votes cast in an election. The number of comparisons required is at most twice the number of votes. Furthermore, the algorithm uses storage in a way that permits an efficie ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 24 (7 self)
- Add to MetaCart
A new algorithm is presented for determining which, if any, of an arbitrary number of candidates has received a majority of the votes cast in an election. The number of comparisons required is at most twice the number of votes. Furthermore, the algorithm uses storage in a way that permits an efficient use of magnetic tape. A Fortran version of the algorithm is exhibited. The Fortran code has been proved correct by a mechanical verification system for Fortran. The system and the proof are discussed. 1 The work described here was conducted in the Computer Science Laboratory of SRI International and suported in part by NASA Contract NAS1-15528, NSF Grant MCS7904081, and ONR Contract N00014-75-C-0816 1981. A brief history of this work is given in the concluding section. 106 Robert S. Boyer and J Strother Moore 5.1 Introduction Reliability may be obtained by redundant computation and voting in critical hardware systems. What is the best way to determine the majority, if any, of a mult...
A Fast Majority Vote Algorithm
- Automated Reasoning: Essays in Honor of Woody Bledsoe
, 1981
"... A new algorithm is presented for determining which, if any, of an arbitrary number of candidates has received a majority of the votes cast in an election. The number of comparisons required is at most twice the number of votes. Furthermore, the algorithm uses storage in a way that permits an efficie ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 23 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
A new algorithm is presented for determining which, if any, of an arbitrary number of candidates has received a majority of the votes cast in an election. The number of comparisons required is at most twice the number of votes. Furthermore, the algorithm uses storage in a way that permits an efficient use of magnetic tape.
A Theorem Prover for a Computational Logic
, 1990
"... We briefly review a mechanical theorem-prover for a logic of recursive functions over finitely generated objects including the integers, ordered pairs, and symbols. The prover, known both as NQTHM and as the Boyer-Moore prover, contains a mechanized principle of induction and implementations of line ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 22 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We briefly review a mechanical theorem-prover for a logic of recursive functions over finitely generated objects including the integers, ordered pairs, and symbols. The prover, known both as NQTHM and as the Boyer-Moore prover, contains a mechanized principle of induction and implementations of linear resolution, rewriting, and arithmetic decision procedures. We describe some applications of the prover, including a proof of the correct implementation of a higher level language on a microprocessor defined at the gate level. We also describe the ongoing project of recoding the entire prover as an applicative function within its own logic.
Proof checking the RSA public key encryption algorithm
- American Mathematical Monthly
, 1984
"... The authors describe the use of a mechanical theorem-prover to check the published proof of the invertibility of the public key encryption algorithm of Rivest, Shamir and Adleman: (M mod n) mod N=M, provided n is the product of two distinct primes p and q, M
Abstract
-
Cited by 21 (9 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The authors describe the use of a mechanical theorem-prover to check the published proof of the invertibility of the public key encryption algorithm of Rivest, Shamir and Adleman: (M mod n) mod N=M, provided n is the product of two distinct primes p and q, M<n, and e and d are multiplicative inverses in the ring of integers modulo (p-1)*(q-1). Among the lemmas proved mechanically and used in the main proof are many familiar theorems of number theory, including Fermat’s theorem: M mod p=1, when p M. The axioms underlying the proofs are those of Peano arithmetic and ordered pairs. The development of mathematics toward greater precision has led, as is well known, to the formalization of large tracts of it, so that one can prove any theorem using nothing but a few mechanical rules.-- Godel [11] But formalized mathematics cannot in practice be written down in full, and therefore we must have confidence in what might be called the common sense of the mathematician... We shall therefore very quickly abandon formalized mathematics...-- Bourbaki [1] 1.
Program verification
- Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1985
"... Computer programs may be regarded as formal mathematical objects whose properties are subject to mathematical proof. Program verification is the use of formal, mathematical techniques to debug software and software specifications. 1. Code Verification How are the properties of computer programs prov ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 14 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Computer programs may be regarded as formal mathematical objects whose properties are subject to mathematical proof. Program verification is the use of formal, mathematical techniques to debug software and software specifications. 1. Code Verification How are the properties of computer programs proved? We discuss three approaches in this article: inductive invariants, functional semantics, and explicit semantics. Because the first approach has received by far the most attention, it has produced the most impressive results to date. However, the field is now moving away from the inductive invariant approach. 1.1. Inductive Assertions The so-called Floyd-Hoare inductive assertion method of program verification [25, 33] has its roots in the classic Goldstine and von Neumann reports [53] and handles the usual kind of programming language, of which FORTRAN is perhaps the best example. In this style of verification, the specifier "annotates " certain points in the program with mathematical assertions that are supposed to describe relations that hold between the program variables and the initial input values each time "control " reaches the annotated point. Among these assertions are some that characterize acceptable input and the desired output. By exploring all possible paths from one assertion to the next and analyzing the effects of intervening program statements it is possible to reduce the correctness of the program to the problem of proving certain derived formulas called verification conditions. Below we illustrate the idea with a simple program for computing the factorial of its integer input N flowchart assertion start with input(N) input N A: = 1 N = 0 yes stop with? answer A

