Academic literature on the topic 'Constrained horn clauses'

In this paper, we present a novel constraint solving method for a class of predicate Constraint Satisfaction Problems (pCSP) where each constraint is represented by an arbitrary clause of first-order predicate logic over predicate variables. The class of pCSP properly subsumes the well-studied class of Constrained Horn Clauses (CHCs) where each constraint is restricted to a Horn clause. The class of CHCs has been widely applied to verification of linear-time safety properties of programs in different paradigms. In this paper, we show that pCSP further widens the applicability to verification of branching-time safety properties of programs that exhibit finitely-branching non-determinism. Solving pCSP (and CHCs) however is challenging because the search space of solutions is often very large (or unbounded), high-dimensional, and non-smooth. To address these challenges, our method naturally combines techniques studied separately in different literatures: counterexample guided inductive synthesis (CEGIS) and probabilistic inference in graphical models. We have implemented the presented method and obtained promising results on existing benchmarks as well as new ones that are beyond the scope of existing CHC solvers.

AbstractIt is well-known that the verification of partial correctness properties of imperative programs can be reduced to the satisfiability problem for constrained Horn clauses (CHCs). However, state-of-the-art solvers for constrained Horn clauses (or CHC solvers) based onpredicate abstractionare sometimes unable to verify satisfiability because they look for models that are definable in a given class 𝓐 of constraints, called 𝓐-definable models. We introduce a transformation technique, calledPredicate Pairing, which is able, in many interesting cases, to transform a set of clauses into an equisatisfiable set whose satisfiability can be proved by finding an 𝓐-definable model, and hence can be effectively verified by a state-of-the-art CHC solver. In particular, we prove that, under very general conditions on 𝓐, the unfold/fold transformation rules preserve the existence of an 𝓐-definable model, that is, if the original clauses have an 𝓐-definable model, then the transformed clauses have an 𝓐-definable model. The converse does not hold in general, and we provide suitable conditions under which the transformed clauses have an 𝓐-definable modelif and only ifthe original ones have an 𝓐-definable model. Then, we present a strategy, called Predicate Pairing, which guides the application of the transformation rules with the objective of deriving a set of clauses whose satisfiability problem can be solved by looking for 𝓐-definable models. The Predicate Pairing (PP) strategy introduces a new predicate defined by the conjunction of two predicates occurring in the original set of clauses, together with a conjunction of constraints. We will show through some examples that an 𝓐-definable model may exist for the new predicate even if it does not exist for its defining atomic conjuncts. We will also present some case studies showing that Predicate Pairing plays a crucial role in the verification ofrelational properties of programs, that is, properties relating two programs (such as program equivalence) or two executions of the same program (such as non-interference). Finally, we perform an experimental evaluation of the proposed techniques to assess the effectiveness of Predicate Pairing in increasing the power of CHC solving.

This work addresses the problem of verifying imperative programs that manipulate data structures, e.g., Rust programs. Data structures are usually modeled by Algebraic Data Types (ADTs) in verification conditions. Inductive invariants of such programs often require recursively defined functions (RDFs) to represent abstractions of data structures. From the logic perspective, this reduces to solving Constrained Horn Clauses (CHCs) modulo both ADT and RDF. The underlying logic with RDFs is undecidable. Thus, even verifying a candidate inductive invariant is undecidable. Similarly, IC3-based algorithms for solving CHCs lose their progress guarantee: they may not find counterexamples when the program is unsafe. We propose a novel IC3-inspired algorithm Racer for solving CHCs modulo ADT and RDF (i.e., automatically synthesizing inductive invariants, as opposed to only verifying them as is done in deductive verification). Racer ensures progress despite the undecidability of the underlying theory, and is guaranteed to terminate with a counterexample for unsafe programs. It works with a general class of RDFs over ADTs called catamorphisms. The key idea is to represent catamorphisms as both CHCs, via relationification , and RDFs, using novel abstractions . Encoding catamorphisms as CHCs allows learning inductive properties of catamorphisms, as well as preserving unsatisfiabilty of the original CHCs despite the use of RDF abstractions, whereas encoding catamorphisms as RDFs allows unfolding the recursive definition, and relying on it in solutions. Abstractions ensure that the underlying theory remains decidable. We implement our approach in Z3 and show that it works well in practice.

Abstract We address the problem of checking the satisfiability of constrained Horn clauses (CHCs) defined on algebraic data types (ADTs), such as lists and trees. We propose a new technique for transforming CHCs defined on ADTs into CHCs where the arguments of the predicates have only basic types, such as integers and booleans. Thus, our technique avoids, during satisfiability checking, the explicit use of proof rules based on induction over the ADTs. The main extension over previous techniques for ADT removal is a new transformation rule, called differential replacement, which allows us to introduce auxiliary predicates, whose definitions correspond to lemmas that are used when making inductive proofs. We present an algorithm that performs the automatic removal of ADTs by applying the new rule, together with the traditional folding/unfolding rules. We prove that, under suitable hypotheses, the set of the transformed clauses is satisfiable if and only if so is the set of the original clauses. By an experimental evaluation, we show that the use of the new rule significantly improves the effectiveness of ADT removal. We also show that our approach is competitive with respect to tools that extend CHC solvers with the use of inductive rules.