Proof-Search in Intuitionistic Logic with Equality, or Back to Simultaneous Rigid E-Unification

We characterize provability in intuitionistic logic with equality in terms of a constraint calculus. This characterization uncovers close connections between provability in intuitionistic logic with equality and solutions to simultaneous rigid E-unification. We show that the problem of existence of a sequent proof with a given skeleton is polynomial-time equivalent to simultaneous rigid E-unifiability. This gives us a proof procedure for intuitionistic logic with equality modulo simultaneous rigid E-unification. We also show that simultaneous rigid E-unifiability is polynomial-time reducible to intuitionistic logic with equality. Thus, any proof procedure for intuitionistic logic with equality can be considered as a procedure for simultaneous rigid E-unifiability. In turn, any procedure for simultaneous rigid E-unifiability gives a procedure for establishing provability in intuitionistic logic with equality.     

Uniform provability realization of intuitionistic logic, modality and λ-terms

The intended meaning of intuitionistic logic is explained by the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov (BHK) provability semantics which informally defines intuitionistic truth as provability and specifies the intuitionistic connectives via operations on proofs. The problem of finding an adequate formalization of the provability semantics and establishing the completeness of the intuitionistic logic Int was first raised by Gödel in 1933. This question turned out to be a part of the more general problem of the intended realization for Gödel's modal logic of provability S4 which was open since 1933. In this tutorial talk we present a provability realization of Int and S4 that solves both of these problems. We describe the logic of explicit provability (LP) with the atoms “t is a proof of F” and establish that every theorem of S4 admits a reading in LP as the statement about operations on proofs. Moreover, both S4 and Int are shown to be complete with respect to this realization. In addition, LP subsumes the λ-calculus, modal λ-calculus, combinatory logic and provides a uniform provability realization of modality and λ-terms.     

On goal-directed provability in classical logic

One of the key features of logic programming is the notion of goal-directed provability. In intuitionistic logic, the notion of uniform proof has been used as a proof-theoretic characterization of this property. Whilst the connections between intuitionistic logic and computation are well known, there is no reason per se why a similar notion cannot be given in classical logic. In this paper we show that there are two notions of goal-directed proof in classical logic, both of which are suitably weaker than that for intuitionistic logic. We show the completeness of this class of proofs for certain fragments, which thus form logic programming languages. As there are more possible variations on the notion of goal-directed provability in classical logic, there is a greater diversity of classical logic programming languages than intuitionistic ones. In particular, we show how logic programs may contain disjunctions in this setting. This provides a proof-theoretic basis for disjunctive logic programs, as well as characterising the “disjunctive” nature of answer substitutions for such programs in terms of the provability properties of the classical connectives Λ and Λ.     

General <Emphasis Type="Italic">E</Emphasis>-unification with Eager Variable Elimination and a Nice Cycle Rule

We present a goal-directed E-unification procedure with eager Variable Elimination and a new rule, Cycle, for the case of collapsing equations – that is, equations of the type x ≈ v where x ∈Var(v). Cycle replaces Variable Decomposition (or the so-called Root Imitation) and thus removes possibility of some obviously unnecessary infinite paths of inferences in the E-unification procedure. We prove that, as in other approaches, such inferences into variable positions in our goal-directed procedure are not needed. Our system is independent of selection rule and complete for any E-unification problem.     

What You Always Wanted to Know about Rigid E-Unification

This paper solves an open problem posed by a number of researchers: the construction of a complete calculus for matrix-based methods with rigid E-unification. The use of rigid E-unification and simultaneous rigid E-unification for such methods was proposed by Gallier et al., in 1987. After our proof of the undecidability of simultaneous rigid E-unification in 1995. (Degtyarev and Voronkov, 1996d), it became clear that one should look for more refined techniques to deal with equality in matrix-based methods. In this article, we define a complete proof procedure for first-order logic with equality based on an incomplete but terminating procedure for rigid E-unification. Our approach is applicable to the connection method and the tableau method and is illustrated on the tableau method.     

Completeness and Counter-Example Generations of a Basic Protocol Logic: (Extended Abstract)

We give an axiomatic system in first-order predicate logic with equality for proving security protocols correct. Our axioms and inference rules derive the basic inference rules, which are explicitly or implicitly used in the literature of protocol logics, hence we call our axiomatic system Basic Protocol Logic (or BPL, for short). We give a formal semantics for BPL, and show the completeness theorem such that for any given query (which represents a correctness property) the query is provable iff it is true for any model. Moreover, as a corollary of our completeness proof, the decidability of provability in BPL holds for any given query. In our formal semantics we consider a “trace” any kind of sequence of primitive actions, counter-models (which are generated from an unprovable query) cannot be immediately regarded as realizable traces (i.e., attacked processes on the protocol in question). However, with the aid of Comon-Treinen's algorithm for the intruder deduction problem, we can determine whether there exists a realizable trace among formal counter-models, if any, generated by the proof-search method (used in our completeness proof). We also demonstrate that our method is useful for both proof construction and flaw analysis by using a simple example.     

E-unification with Constants vs. General E-unification

We present a solution to Problem #66 from the RTA open problem list. The question is whether there exists an equational theory E such that E-unification with constants is decidable but general E-unification is undecidable. The answer is positive and we show such a theory. The problem has several equivalent formulations, therefore the solution has many consequences. Our result also shows, that there exist two theories E ₁ and E ₂ over disjoint signatures, such that E ₁-unification with constants and E ₂-unification with constants are decidable, but (E ₁ ∪ E ₂)-unification with constants is undecidable.     

A proof–theoretic study of the correspondence of hybrid logic and classical logic

In this paper, we show the equivalence between the provability of a proof system of basic hybrid logic and that of translated formulas of the classical predicate logic with equality and explicit substitution by a purely proof–theoretic method. Then we show the equivalence of two groups of proof systems of hybrid logic: the group of labelled deduction systems and the group of modal logic-based systems.     

Focusing and polarization in linear,intuitionistic, and classical logics

A focused proof system provides a normal form to cut-free proofs in which the application of invertible and non-invertible inference rules is structured. Within linear logic, the focused proof system of Andreoli provides an elegant and comprehensive normal form for cut-free proofs. Within intuitionistic and classical logics, there are various different proof systems in the literature that exhibit focusing behavior. These focused proof systems have been applied to both the proof search and the proof normalization approaches to computation. We present a new, focused proof system for intuitionistic logic, called LJF, and show how other intuitionistic proof systems can be mapped into the new system by inserting logical connectives that prematurely stop focusing. We also use LJF to design a focused proof system LKF for classical logic. Our approach to the design and analysis of these systems is based on the completeness of focusing in linear logic and on the notion of polarity that appears in Girard’s LC and LU proof systems.     

A Framework for Proof Systems

Linear logic can be used as a meta-logic to specify a range of object-level proof systems. In particular, we show that by providing different polarizations within a focused proof system for linear logic, one can account for natural deduction (normal and non-normal), sequent proofs (with and without cut), and tableaux proofs. Armed with just a few, simple variations to the linear logic encodings, more proof systems can be accommodated, including proof system using generalized elimination and generalized introduction rules. In general, most of these proof systems are developed for both classical and intuitionistic logics. By using simple results about linear logic, we can also give simple and modular proofs of the soundness and relative completeness of all the proof systems we consider.     

A proof procedure for the logic of hereditary Harrop formulas

A proof procedure is presented for a class of formulas in intuitionistic logic. These formulas are the so-calledgoal formulas in the theory of hereditary Harrop formulas. Proof search in intuitionistic logic is complicated by the nonexistence of a Herbrand-like theorem for this logic: formulas cannot in general be preprocessed into a form such as the clausal form, and the construction of a proof is often sensitive to the order in which the connectives and quantifiers are analyzed. An interesting aspect of the formulas we consider here is that this analysis can be carried out in a relatively controlled manner in their context. In particular, the task of finding a proof can be reduced to one of demonstrating that a formula follows from a set of assumptions, with the next step in this process being determined by the structure of the conclusion formula. An acceptable implementation of this observation must utilize unification. However, since our formulas may contain universal and existential quantifiers in mixed order, care must be exercised to ensure the correctness of unification. One way of realizing this requirement involves labelling constants and variables and then using these labels to constrain unification. This form of unification is presented and used in a proof procedure for goal formulas in a first-order version of hereditary Harrop formulas. Modifications to this procedure for the relevant formulas in a higher-order logic are also described. The proof procedure that we present has a practical value in that it provides the basis for an implementation of the logic programming language Prolog.     

Theorem Proving Modulo

Deduction modulo is a way to remove computational arguments from proofs by reasoning modulo a congruence on propositions. Such a technique, issued from automated theorem proving, is of general interest because it permits one to separate computations and deductions in a clean way. The first contribution of this paper is to define a sequent calculus modulo that gives a proof-theoretic account of the combination of computations and deductions. The congruence on propositions is handled through rewrite rules and equational axioms. Rewrite rules apply to terms but also directly to atomic propositions. The second contribution is to give a complete proof search method, called extended narrowing and resolution (ENAR), for theorem proving modulo such congruences. The completeness of this method is proved with respect to provability in sequent calculus modulo. An important application is that higher-order logic can be presented as a theory in deduction modulo. Applying the ENAR method to this presentation of higher-order logic subsumes full higher-order resolution. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Theorem Prover for Intuitionistic Logic Based on the Inverse Method

The first-order intuitionistic logic is a formal theory from the family of constructive logics. In intuitionistic logic, it is possible to extract a particular example x = a and a proof of a formula P(a) from a proof of a formula ?xP(x). Owing to this feature, intuitionistic logic has many applications in mathematics and computer science. Many modern proof assistants include automated tactics for the first-order intuitionistic logic, which simplify the task of solving challenging problems, such as formal verification of software, hardware, and protocols. In this paper, a new theorem prover (called WhaleProver) for full first-order intuitionistic logic is presented. Testing on the ILTP benchmarking library has shown that WhaleProver performance is comparable with the state-of-the-art intuitionistic provers. Our prover has solved more than 800 problems from the ILTP version 1.1.2. Some of them are intractable for other provers. WhaleProver is based on the inverse method proposed by S.Yu. Maslov. We introduce an intuitionistic inverse method calculus which is, in turn, a special kind of sequent calculus. It is also described how to adopt for this calculus several existing proof search strategies proposed for different logical calculi by S.Yu. Maslov, V.P. Orevkov, A.A. Voronkov, and others. In addition, a new proof search strategy is proposed that allows one to avoid redundant inferences. The paper includes results of experiments with WhaleProver on the ILTP library. We believe that Whale- Prover can be used as a test bench for different inference procedures and strategies, as well as for educational purposes.     

Resolution with Order and Selection for Hybrid Logics

We investigate labeled resolution calculi for hybrid logics with inference rules restricted via selection functions and orders. We start by providing a sound and refutationally complete calculus for the hybrid logic H(@,ˉ,A)\mathcal{H}(@,{\downarrow},\mathsf{A}), even under restrictions by selection functions and orders. Then, by imposing further restrictions in the original calculus, we develop a sound, complete and terminating calculus for the H(@)\mathcal{H}(@) sublanguage. The proof scheme we use to show refutational completeness of these calculi is an adaptation of a standard completeness proof for saturation-based calculi for first-order logic that guarantees completeness even under redundancy elimination. In fact, one of the contributions of this article is to show that the general framework of saturation-based proving for first-order logic with equality can be naturally adapted to saturation-based calculi for other languages, in particular modal and hybrid logics.     

Hybrid

Combining higher-order abstract syntax and (co)-induction in a logical framework is well known to be problematic. We describe the theory and the practice of a tool called Hybrid, within Isabelle/HOL and Coq, which aims to address many of these difficulties. It allows object logics to be represented using higher-order abstract syntax, and reasoned about using tactical theorem proving and principles of (co)induction. Moreover, it is definitional, which guarantees consistency within a classical type theory. The idea is to have a de Bruijn representation of λ-terms providing a definitional layer that allows the user to represent object languages using higher-order abstract syntax, while offering tools for reasoning about them at the higher level. In this paper we describe how to use Hybrid in a multi-level reasoning fashion, similar in spirit to other systems such as Twelf and Abella. By explicitly referencing provability in a middle layer called a specification logic, we solve the problem of reasoning by (co)induction in the presence of non-stratifiable hypothetical judgments, which allow very elegant and succinct specifications of object logic inference rules. We first demonstrate the method on a simple example, formally proving type soundness (subject reduction) for a fragment of a pure functional language, using a minimal intuitionistic logic as the specification logic. We then prove an analogous result for a continuation-machine presentation of the operational semantics of the same language, encoded this time in an ordered linear logic that serves as the specification layer. This example demonstrates the ease with which we can incorporate new specification logics, and also illustrates a significantly more complex object logic whose encoding is elegantly expressed using features of the new specification logic.     

Retiming synchronous circuitry

This paper describes a circuit transformation calledretiming in which registers are added at some points in a circuit and removed from others in such a way that the functional behavior of the circuit as a whole is preserved. We show that retiming can be used to transform a given synchronous circuit into a more efficient circuit under a variety of different cost criteria. We model a circuit as a graph in which the vertex setV is a collection of combinational logic elements and the edge setE is the set of interconnections, each of which may pass through zero or more registers. We give anO(¦V∥E¦lg¦V¦) algorithm for determining an equivalent retimed circuit with the smallest possible clock period. We show that the problem of determining an equivalent retimed circuit with minimum state (total number of registers) is polynomial-time solvable. This result yields a polynomial-time optimal solution to the problem of pipelining combinational circuitry with minimum register cost. We also give a chacterization of optimal retiming based on an efficiently solvable mixed-integer linear-programming problem.     

Condensed detachment is complete for relevance logic: A computer-aided proof

The condensed detachment ruleD is a combination of modus ponens with a minimal amount of substitution. EarlierD has been shown to be complete for intuitionistic and classical implicational logic but incomplete forBCK andBCI logic. We show thatD is complete for the relevance logic. One of the main steps is the proof of the formula ((a a) a) a found in interaction with our resolution theorem prover. Various strategies of generating consequences of the axioms and choosing best ones for the next iteration were tried until the proof was found.     

A new deductive approach to planning

We introduce a new deductive approach to planning which is based on Horn clauses. Plans as well as situations are represented as terms and, thus, are first-class objects. We do neither need frame axioms nor state-literals. The only rule of inference is the SLDE-resolution rule, i.e. SLD-resolution, where the traditional unification algorithm has been replaced by anE-unification procedure. We exemplify the properties of our method such as forward and backward reasoning, plan checking, and the integration of general theories. Finally, we present the calculus and show that it is sound and complete. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the German Workshop on Artificial Intelligence, 1989.     

A logic for reasoning about probabilities

We consider a language for reasoning about probability which allows us to make statements such as “the probability of E₁ is less than ” and “the probability of E₁ is at least twice the probability of E₂,” where E₁ and E₂ are arbitrary events. We consider the case where all events are measurable (i.e., represent measurable sets) and the more general case, which is also of interest in practice, where they may not be measurable. The measurable case is essentially a formalization of (the propositional fragment of) Nilsson's probabilistic logic. As we show elsewhere, the general (nonmeasurable) case corresponds precisely to replacing probability measures by Dempster-Shafer belief functions. In both cases, we provide a complete axiomatization and show that the problem of deciding satisfiability is NP-complete, no worse than that of propositional logic. As a tool for proving our complete axiomatizations, we give a complete axiomatization for reasoning about Boolean combinations of linear inequalities, which is of independent interest. This proof and others make crucial use of results from the theory of linear programming. We then extend the language to allow reasoning about conditional probability and show that the resulting logic is decidable and completely axiomatizable, by making use of the theory of real closed fields.     

On fuzzy equality and approximation in fuzzy logic

The paper is a contribution to the theory of fuzzy logic in narrow sense with evaluated syntax (FLn). We show that the concepts of fuzzy equality and the provability degree enable to generalize the concept of fuzzy approximation. In the second part of the paper we return to the Mamdani-Assilian formula, which is formed on the basis of the so called totally bounded fuzzy equality and using which we can approximate any function with the prescribed accuracy.This paper has been supported by Grant A1187901/99 of the GA AV R and the project VS96037 of MMT of the Czech Republic.