Model-Guided Proof Debugging

In automated deduction, the final goal is to achieve a fully au tomatic proof system: given a logical specification of a problem, take a high-performanc e theorem prover, and let it do the work. Unfortunately, this does not work in practice, not only because theorem provers often lack finding the proof within reasonable time, but also because the specification is error-prone. For the latter, in the literature several meth ods are proposed for detecting and verifying errors in logic programs. In order to enable such a nalyses, usually termination of computation is presupposed. In this paper, we introduce techniques which are also applic able in the case of nontermination. One important aspect is the use of a natural lan gu ge interface for inspecting even intermediate results of the proof search. By this, we ar e able to investigate the given specification wrt. critical properties: correctness wrt. a n intended model, completeness, and sufficiency for answering given queries. For this, we employ tableau-based calculi, especially hyper-tableauxbecause of its model-building capability that is very helpf ul for debugging axiomatizations. 1 Motivation: The Deduction Life Cycle Automated deduction makes life easy: given a logical specification of your problem , take a highperformance theorem prover and let it do the work. Unfortunately, this is only a dre am. In some cases it works for benchmark suites like the TPTP library [24]. There, a huge numbe r of problems is given in form of a logical specification and the interesting question is, whe ther a prover can solve the problems—in most cases they have been solved by many other provers bef ore—, and if it can, how fast? In real life, however, the problem is to find the appropriate logical formalization of the given problem. Once a formalization is found, the capabilities of theorem pro vers can be used to process the logical formulae—and usually one finds out, that the formalization w s ot as intended: either it was inconsistent or it did not meet the requirements. Our pape r takes such a situation as the starting point.

[1]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  Model Elimination, Logic Programming and Computing Answers , 1995, IJCAI.

[2]  A. Winter.  Generic Support for Understanding Heterogeneous Software Generic Support for Understanding Heterogeneous Software , 1995 .

[3]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  A Generic System to Support Multi-Level Understanding of Heterogeneous Software , 1997 .

[4]  Gottfried Vossen,et al.  I-Serializability: Generalized Correctness for Transaction-Based Environments , 1997, Inf. Process. Lett..

[5]  Harro Wimmel.  Fachberichte Informatik on Some Compositional Petri Net Semantics Universitt at Koblenz{landau on Some Compositional Petri Net Semantics , 1995 .

[6]  William McCune,et al.  SCOTT: Semantically Constrained Otter System Description , 1994, CADE.

[7]  Chandrabose Aravindan,et al.  A Rational and Efficient Algorithm for View Deletion in Databases , 1997, ILPS.

[8]  Stephan Philippi,et al.  Integration of Integrity Constraints into Object-Oriented Database Schema according to ODMG-93 , 1995 .

[9]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  Meta-CASE in Practice: a Case for KOGGE , 1997, CAiSE.

[10]  Stephan Philippi,et al.  System modelling using Object-Oriented Pr / T-Nets , 1997 .

[11]  Frieder Stolzenburg,et al.  Membership-Constraints and Complexity in Logic Programming with Sets , 1996, FroCoS.

[12]  Martin Volk,et al.  Constraint Logic Programming for Computational Linguistics , 1996, LACL.

[13]  Lutz Priese,et al.  A Uniform Approach to True-Concurrency and Interleaving Semantics for Petri Nets , 1998, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Towards Well-Behaved Semantics Suitable for Aggregation , 1997 .

[15]  Volker Sorge,et al.  ΩMEGA : Towards a mathematical assistant , 1997 .

[16]  William McCune,et al.  OTTER 3.0 Reference Manual and Guide , 1994 .

[17]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  Specifying Object Oriented Systems Using Gdmo, Zest and Sdl'92 Specifying Object Oriented Systems Using Gdmo, Zest and Sdl'92 Reports of the Gdmo Project Specifying Object Oriented Systems Using Gdmo, Zest and Sdl'92 , 1997 .

[18]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  PROTEIN: A PROver with a Theory Extension INterface , 1994, CADE.

[19]  Frieder Stolzenburg,et al.  A Flexible System for Constraint Disjunctive Logic Programming , 1998, Künstliche Intell..

[20]  P. Simons.  Eecient Implementation of the Well- Founded and Stable Model Seman- Tics , 1996 .

[21]  Chandrabose Aravindan.  An Abductive Framework for Negation in Disjunctive Logic Programming , 1996, JELIA.

[22]  Angelika Franzke.  GRAL 2.0: A Reference Manual , 1997 .

[23]  Ilkka Niemelä.  Implementing Circumscription Using a Tableau Method , 1996, ECAI.

[24]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  A Comparison of STATIC Semantics with D-WFS , 1996 .

[25]  Wolfgang Albrecht,et al.  Integrating Fixed Priority and Static Scheduling to Maintain External Consistency , 1997 .

[26]  Christoph Goller,et al.  SETHEO V3.2: Recent Developments - System Abstract , 1994, CADE.

[27]  Thomas Marx,et al.  NetCASE -- a Petri Net based Method for Database Application Design and Generation , 1995 .

[28]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  Semantically Guided Theorem Proving for Diagnosis Applications , 1997, IJCAI.

[29]  Ehud Shapiro,et al.  Algorithmic Program Debugging , 1983 .

[30]  Bart Selman,et al.  Pushing the Envelope: Planning, Propositional Logic and Stochastic Search , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 2.

[31]  Wenjin Lu.  Minimal Model Generation Based on E-hyper Tableaux , 1997, KI.

[32]  François Bry,et al.  SATCHMO: A Theorem Prover Implemented in Prolog , 1988, CADE.

[33]  Miyuki Koshimura,et al.  MGTP: A Parallel Theorem Prover Based on Lazy Model Generation , 1992, CADE.

[34]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  The extract-transform-rewrite cycle: a step towards metaCARE , 1998, Proceedings of the Second Euromicro Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering.

[35]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  A Theory of Diagnosis from First Principles , 1986, Artif. Intell..

[36]  Lutz Priese,et al.  Abstract Fairness and Semantics , 1997, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[37]  Chandrabose Aravindan.  DisLoP: A Disjunctive Logic Programming System Based on PROTEIN Theorem Prover , 1996, KI.

[38]  L Priese,et al.  Finite H-systems with 3 test tubes are not predictable. , 1998, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[39]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Characterizations and Implementation of Static Semantics of Disjunctive Programs , 1996 .

[40]  U. Furbach.  Re nements for Restart Model Elimination , 1996 .

[41]  Ilkka Niemell.  A Tableau Calculus for Minimal Model Reasoning Ilkka Niemel a a Tableau Calculus for Minimal Model Reasoning , 1996 .

[42]  Manfred Kamp.  Managing a multi-file, multi-language software repository for program comprehension tools: a generic approach , 1998, Proceedings. 6th International Workshop on Program Comprehension. IWPC'98 (Cat. No.98TB100242).

[43]  Jens Woch,et al.  A Component-based and Abstractivistic Agent Architecture for the Modelling of Mas in the Social Sciences , 1997 .

[44]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  Calculi for Disjunctive Logic Programming , 1997, ILPS.

[45]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Reducing Disjunctive to Non-Disjunctive Semantics by Shift-Operations , 1996, Fundam. Informaticae.

[46]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  Program comprehension in multi-language systems , 1998, Proceedings Fifth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (Cat. No.98TB100261).

[47]  Luís Moniz Pereira,et al.  Proceedings of the European Workshop on Logics in Artificial Intelligence , 1994 .

[48]  T. Tammet.  10th international conference on automated deduction , 1991 .

[49]  Ingo Dahn,et al.  Integration of Automated and Interactive Theorem Proving in ILP , 1997, CADE.

[50]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  Hyper Tableaux The Next Generation , 1997 .

[51]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Non-monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming: Theory, Implementation and Applications , 1996 .

[52]  Luís Moniz Pereira,et al.  Prolegomena to Logic Programming for Non-monotonic Reasoning , 1996, NMELP.

[53]  Michael Kühn.  Rigid Hypertableaux , 1997, KI.

[54]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  Graph Based Modeling and Implementation with EER / GRAL , 1996, ER.

[55]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  A Framework to Incorporate Non-Monotonic Reasoning Into Constraint Logic Programming , 1998, J. Log. Program..

[56]  Carlo Simon,et al.  The Petri Net Tools Neptun and Poseidon , 1997 .

[57]  Kurt Stenzel,et al.  Proving System Correctness with KIV 3.0 , 1997, CADE.

[58]  Lars Kulik,et al.  An Axiomatic Approach to the Spatial Relations Underlying Left-Right and in Front of-Behind , 1997, KI.

[59]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Knowledge Representation with Logic Programs , 1997, LPKR.

[60]  Angelika Franzke,et al.  Recommendations for an Improvement of GDMO Final Report of the GDMO Project March 1997 , 1997 .