PxTP 2013 Papers with Abstracts

Volume: | Jasmin Christian Blanchette and Josef Urban (editors) PxTP 2013. Third International Workshop on Proof Exchange for Theorem Proving |

Abstract. The Kepler conjecture asserts that no packing of congruent balls in three-dimensional Euclidean space has density greater than that of the familiar cannonball arrangement. The proof of the Kepler conjecture was announced in 1998, but it went several years without publication because of the lingering doubts of referees about the correctness of the proof. In response to these publication hurdles, the Flyspeck project seeks to give a complete formal proof of the Kepler conjecture using the proof assistant HOL Light.The original proof of the Kepler relies on long computer calculations, and these calculations present special formalization challenges. A major part of the Flyspeck project requires the integration of external computational tools with the proof assistant. Some of these external tools are the GNU linear programming kit, AMPL (a modeling language for mathematical programming), Mathematica calculations, nonlinear optimization, and custom code in C++, C, C#, Java, and Objective Caml. Earlier work by A. Solovyev has implemented efficient linear programming in HOL Light. This talk will include a description of his more recent work that automates the link between linear programming and the Flyspeck project. | |

Abstract. LEO-II cooperates with other theorem-provers to prove theorems in classical higher-order logic. It returns hybrid proofs, containing inferences made by LEO-II as well as the backend provers with which it cooperates. This article describes recent improvements made to LEO-II. | |

Abstract. This paper presents an algorithm that redirects proofs by contradiction. The input is a refutation graph, as produced by an automatic theorem prover (e.g., E, SPASS, Vampire, Z3); the output is a direct proof expressed in natural deduction extended with case analyses and nested subproofs. The algorithm is implemented in Isabelle’s Sledgehammer, where it enhances the legibility of machine-generated proofs. | |

Abstract. We define a translation that maps higher-order formulas provable in a classical extensional setting to semantically equivalent formulas provable in an intuitionistic intensional setting. For the classical extensional higher-order proof system we define a Henkin-complete tableau calculus. For the intuitionistic intensional higher-order proof system we give a natural deduction calculus. We prove that tableau provability of a formula implies provability of a translated formula in the natural deduction calculus. Implicit in this proof is a method for translating classical extensional tableau refutations into intuitionistic intensional natural deduction proofs. | |

Abstract. The λΠ-calculus modulo is a proof language that has been proposed as a proof standardfor (re-)checking and interoperability. Resolution and superposition are proof-search methods that are used in state-of-the-art first-order automated theorem provers. We provide a shallow embedding of resolution and superposition proofs in the λΠ-calculus modulo, thus offering a way to check these proofs in a trusted setting, and to combine them with other proofs. We implement this embedding as a backend of the prover iProver Modulo. | |

Abstract. We present the design philosophy of a proof checker based on a notion of foundational proof certificates. At the heart of this design is a semantics of proof evidence that arises from recent advances in the theory of proofs for classical and intuitionistic logic. That semantics is then performed by a (higher-order) logic program: successful performance means that a formal proof of a theorem has been found. We describe how the lambda Prolog programming language provides several features that help guarantee such a soundness claim. Some of these features (such as strong typing, abstract datatypes, and higher-order programming) were features of the ML programming language when it was first proposed as a proof checker for LCF. Other features of lambda Prolog (such as support for bindings, substitution, and backtracking search) turn out to be equally important for describing and checking the proof evidence encoded in proof certificates. Since trusting our proof checker requires trusting a programming language implementation, we discuss various avenues for enhancing one's trust of such a checker. | |

Nada Habli and Amy Felty Abstract. We describe ongoing work on building an environment to support reasoning in proof assistants that represent formal systems using higher-order abstract syntax (HOAS). We use a simple and general specification language whose syntax supports HOAS. Using this language, we can encode the syntax and inference rules of a variety of formal systems, such as programming languages and logics. We describe our tool, implemented in OCaml, which parses this syntax, and translates it to a Coq library that includes definitions and hints for aiding automated proof in the Hybrid system. Hybrid itself is implemented in Coq, and designed specifically to reason about such formal systems. Given an input specification, the library that is automatically generated by our tool imports the general Hybrid library and adds definitions and hints for aiding automated proof in Hybrid about the specific programming language or logic defined in the specification. This work is part of a larger project to compare reasoning in systems supporting HOAS. Our current work focuses on Hybrid, Abella, Twelf, and Beluga, and the specification language is designed to be general enough to allow the automatic generation of libraries for all of these systems from a single specification. | |

Abstract. Rewriting is a common functionality in proof assistants, that allows to simplify theorems and goals. The set of equations to use in a rewrite step has to be manually specified, and therefore often includes rules which may lead to non-termination. Even in the case of termination another desirable property of a simplification set would be confluence. A well-known technique from rewriting to transform a terminating system into a terminating and confluent one is completion. But the sets of equations we find in the context of proof assistants are typically huge and most state-of-the-art completion tools only work on relatively small problems. In this paper we describe our initial experiments with the aim to close the gap and use rewriting to compute a complete first-order simplification set for a HOL-based proof assistant fully automatically. | |

Abstract. Two complementary AI methods are used to improve the strength of the AI/ATP service for proving conjectures over the HOL Light and Flyspeck corpora. First, several schemes for frequency-based feature weighting are explored in combination with distance-weighted k-nearest-neighbor classifier. This results in 16% improvement (39.0% to 45.5% Flyspeck problems solved) of the overall strength of the service when using 14 CPUs and 30 seconds. The best premise-selection/ATP combination is improved from 24.2% to 31.4%, i.e. by 30%. A smaller improvement is obtained by evolving targetted E prover strategies on two particular premise selections, using the Blind Strategymaker (BliStr) system. This raises the performance of the best AI/ATP method from 31.4% to 34.9%, i.e. by 11%, and raises the current 14-CPU power of the service to 46.9%. | |

Abstract. When checking answers coming from automatic provers, or when skeptically integrating them into proof assistants, a major problem is the wide variety of formats of certificates, which forces to write lots of different checkers. In this paper, we propose to use the extended resolution as a common format for every propositional prover. To be able to do this, we detail two algorithms transforming proofs computed respectively by tableaux provers and provers based on {\bdd}s into this format. Since this latter is already implemented for SAT solvers, it is now possible for the three most common propositional provers to share the same certificates. | |

Abstract. OpenTheory is being used for the first time (in work to be described at ITP 2013) as a tool in a larger project, as opposed to in an example demonstrating OpenTheory's capability. The tool works, demonstrating its viability. But it does not work completely smoothly, because the use case is somewhat at odds with OpenTheory's primary design goals. In this extended abstract, we explore the tensions between the goals that OpenTheory-like systems might have, and question the relative importance of various kinds of use. My hope is that describing issues arising from work in progress will stimulate fruitful discussion relevant to the development of proof exchange systems. | |

Abstract. Sledgehammer integrates external automatic theorem provers (ATPs) in the Isabelle/HOL proof assistant. To guard against bugs, ATP proofs must be reconstructed in Isabelle. Reconstructing complex proofs involves translating them to detailed Isabelle proof texts, using suitable proof methods to justify the inferences. This has been attempted before with little success, but we have addressed the main issues: Sledgehammer now transforms the proofs by contradiction into direct proofs (as described in a companion paper); it reconstructs skolemization inferences; it provides the right amount of type annotations to ensure formulas are parsed correctly without overwhelming them with types; and it iteratively tests and compresses the output, resulting in simpler and faster proofs. |