![]() |
![]() |
Separation logic is successful for software verification of heap-manipulating programs. Numbers are necessary to be added to separation logic for verification of practical software where numbers are important. However, properties of the validity such as decidability and complexity for separation logic with numbers have not been fully studied yet. This paper presents the translation of Pi-0-1 formulas in Peano arithmetic to formulas in a small fragment of separation logic with numbers, which consists only of the intuitionistic points-to predicate, 0 and the successor function. Then this paper proves that a formula in Peano arithmetic is valid in the standard model if and only if its translation in this fragment is valid in the standard interpretation. As a corollary, this paper also gives a perspective proof for the undecidability of the validity in this fragment. Since Pi-0-1 formulas can describe consistency of logical systems and non-termination of computations, this result also shows that these properties discussed in Peano arithmetic can also be discussed in such a small fragment of separation logic with numbers.
We present a new extended resolution clause learning (ERCL) algorithm, implemented as part of a conflict-driven clause-learning (CDCL) SAT solver, wherein new variables are dynamically introduced as definitions for {\it Dual Implication Points} (DIPs) in the implication graph constructed by the solver at runtime. DIPs are generalizations of unique implication points and can be informally viewed as a pair of dominator nodes, from the decision variable at the highest decision level to the conflict node, in an implication graph. We perform extensive experimental evaluation to establish the efficacy of our ERCL method, implemented as part of the MapleLCM SAT solver and dubbed xMapleLCM, against several leading solvers including the baseline MapleLCM, as well as CDCL solvers such as Kissat 3.1.1, CryptoMiniSat 5.11, and SBVA+CaDiCaL, the winner of SAT Competition 2023. We show that xMapleLCM outperforms these solvers on Tseitin and XORified formulas. We further compare xMapleLCM with GlucoseER, a system that implements extended resolution in a different way, and provide a detailed comparative analysis of their performance.
This paper presents a class of epistemic logics that captures the dynamics of acquiring knowledge and descending into oblivion, while incorporating concepts of group knowledge. The approach is grounded in a system of weighted models, introducing an ``epistemic skills'' metric to represent the epistemic capacities tied to knowledge updates. Within this framework, knowledge acquisition is modeled as a process of upskilling, whereas oblivion is represented as a consequence of downskilling. The framework further enables exploration of ``knowability'' and ``forgettability,'' defined as the potential to gain knowledge through upskilling and to lapse into oblivion through downskilling, respectively. Additionally, it supports a detailed analysis of the distinctions between epistemic de re and de dicto expressions. The computational complexity of the model checking and satisfiability problems is examined, offering insights into their theoretical foundations and practical implications.
Modern SAT or QBF solvers are expected to produce correctness certificates. However, certificates have worst-case exponential size (unless NP=coNP), and at recent SAT competitions the largest certificates of unsatisfiability are starting to reach terabyte size. This puts limits to the development of SAT-solving services in which a client with limited computational power sends a formula to a solver running on a powerful server, which returns a certificate to be checked by the client. Recently, Couillard et al. have suggested to replace certificates with interactive proof systems based on the IP=PSPACE theorem. They have presented an interactive protocol between a prover and a verifier for an extension of QBF. The overall running time of the protocol is linear in the time needed by a standard BDD-based algorithm, and the time invested by the verifier is polynomial in the size of the formula. (So, in particular, the verifier never has to read or process exponentially long certificates). We call such an interactive protocol competitive with the BDD algorithm for solving QBF. While BDD algorithms are state-of-the-art for certain classes of QBF instances, no modern (UN)SAT solver is based on BDDs. For this reason, we initiate the study of interactive certification for more practical SAT algorithms. In particular, we address the question whether interactive protocols can be competitive with some variant of resolution. We present two contributions. First, we prove a theorem that […]
Finite-horizon probabilistic multiagent concurrent game systems, also known as finite multiplayer stochastic games, are a well-studied model in computer science due to their ability to represent a wide range of real-world scenarios involving strategic interactions among agents over a finite amount of iterations (given by the finite-horizon). The analysis of these games typically focuses on evaluating (verifying) and computing (synthesizing/realizing) which strategy profiles (functions that represent the behavior of each agent) qualify as equilibria. The two most prominent equilibrium concepts are the Nash equilibrium and the subgame perfect equilibrium, with the latter considered a conceptual refinement of the former. Computing these equilibria from scratch is, however, often computationally infeasible. Therefore, recent attention has shifted to the verification problem, where a given strategy profile must be evaluated to determine whether it satisfies equilibrium conditions. In this paper, we demonstrate that the verification problem for subgame perfect equilibria lies in PSPACE, while for Nash equilibria, it is EXPTIME-complete. This is a highly counterintuitive result since subgame perfect equilibria are often seen as a strict strengthening of Nash equilibria and are intuitively seen as more complicated.
Stefan Milius
Editor-in-Chief
Brigitte Pientka
Fabio Zanasi
Executive Editors
eISSN: 1860-5974