Abstract
In an attempt to improve automation capabilities in the Coq proof assistant, we develop a tactic for the propositional fragment based on the DPLL procedure. Although formulas naturally arising in interactive proofs do not require a state-of-the-art SAT solver, the conversion to clausal form required by DPLL strongly damages the performance of the procedure. In this paper, we present a reflexive DPLL algorithm formalized in Coq which outperforms the existing tactics. It is tightly coupled with a lazy CNF conversion scheme which, unlike Tseitin-style approaches, does not disrupt the procedure. This conversion relies on a lazy mechanism which requires slight adaptations of the original DPLL. As far as we know, this is the first formal proof of this mechanism and its Coq implementation raises interesting challenges.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bezem, M., Hendriks, D., de Nivelle, H.: Automated proof construction in type theory using resolution. JAR 29(3), 253–275 (2002)
Bonichon, R., Delahaye, D., Doligez, D.: Zenon: An extensible automated theorem prover producing checkable proofs. In: Dershowitz, N., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4790, pp. 151–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Boutin, S.: Using reflection to build efficient and certified decision procedures. In: Abadi, M., Ito, T. (eds.) TACS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1281, pp. 515–529. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Chrząszcz, J.: Implementation of modules in the Coq system. In: Basin, D., Wolff, B. (eds.) TPHOLs 2003. LNCS, vol. 2758, pp. 270–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Conchon, S., Contejean, E.: The Alt-Ergo Prover, http://alt-ergo.lri.fr/
Contejean, E., Corbineau, P.: Reflecting Proofs in First-Order Logic with Equality. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) CADE 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3632, pp. 7–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Contejean, E., Courtieu, P., Forest, J., Pons, O., Urbain, X.: Certification of automated termination proofs. In: Konev, B., Wolter, F. (eds.) FroCos 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4720, pp. 148–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
The Coq Proof Assistant, http://coq.inria.fr/
Corbineau, P.: Deciding equality in the constructor theory. In: Altenkirch, T., McBride, C. (eds.) TYPES 2006. LNCS, vol. 4502, pp. 78–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A machine program for theorem-proving. Communication of the ACM 5(7), 394–397 (1962)
Davis, M., Putnam, H.: A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7(3), 201–215 (1960)
de la Tour, T.B.: Minimizing the number of clauses by renaming. In: Stickel, M.E. (ed.) CADE-10 1990. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 449, pp. 558–572. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)
de Moura, L.M., Bjørner, N.: Efficient E-matching for SMT solvers. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4603, pp. 183–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Delahaye, D., Mayero, M.: Field: une procédure de décision pour les nombres réels en Coq. In: JFLA, Pontarlier (France), INRIA, Janvier (2001)
Detlefs, D., Nelson, G., Saxe, J.B.: Simplify: a theorem prover for program checking. J. ACM 52(3), 365–473 (2005)
Dyckhoff, R.: Contraction-free sequent calculi for intuitionistic logic. J. Symb. Log. 57(3), 795–807 (1992)
Dyckhoff, R.: Some benchmark formulae for intuitionistic propositional logic (1997)
Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible sat-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Filliâtre, J.-C., Conchon, S.: Type-safe modular hash-consing. In: Kennedy, A., Pottier, F. (eds.) ML, pp. 12–19. ACM, New York (2006)
Grégoire, B., Mahboubi, A.: Proving equalities in a commutative ring done right in Coq. In: Hurd, J., Melham, T. (eds.) TPHOLs 2005. LNCS, vol. 3603, pp. 98–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Lescuyer, S., Conchon, S.: A Reflexive Formalization of a SAT Solver in Coq. In: TPHOLS 2008 Emerging Trends (2008)
Meng, J., Quigley, C., Paulson, L.C.: Automation for interactive proof: first prototype. Inf. Comput. 204(10), 1575–1596 (2006)
Moskewicz, M.W., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: engineering an efficient sat solver. In: DAC 2001, pp. 530–535. ACM Press, New York (2001)
Nonnengart, A., Rock, G., Weidenbach, C.: On generating small clause normal forms. In: Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H. (eds.) CADE 1998. LNCS, vol. 1421, pp. 397–411. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Plaisted, D.A., Greenbaum, S.: A structure-preserving clause form translation. J. Symb. Comput. 2(3), 293–304 (1986)
Pugh, W.: The omega test: a fast and practical integer programming algorithm for dependence analysis. Communications of the ACM 8, 4–13 (1992)
Tseitin, G.S.: On the complexity of derivations in the propositional calculus, Part II. Studies in Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, pp. 115–125 (1968)
Weber, T., Amjad, H.: Efficiently Checking Propositional Refutations in HOL Theorem Provers. Journal of Applied Logic 7, 26–40 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lescuyer, S., Conchon, S. (2009). Improving Coq Propositional Reasoning Using a Lazy CNF Conversion Scheme. In: Ghilardi, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds) Frontiers of Combining Systems. FroCoS 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5749. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04222-5_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04222-5_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04221-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04222-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)