Induction in Saturation-Based Proof Search

  • Giles RegerEmail author
  • Andrei Voronkov
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11716)


Many applications of theorem proving, for example program verification and analysis, require first-order reasoning with both quantifiers and theories such as arithmetic and datatypes. There is no complete procedure for reasoning in such theories but the state-of-the-art in automated theorem proving is still able to reason effectively with real-world problems from this rich domain. In this paper we contribute to a missing part of the puzzle: automated induction inside a saturation-based theorem prover. Our goal is to incorporate lightweight automated induction in a way that complements the saturation-based approach, allowing us to solve problems requiring a combination of first-order reasoning, theory reasoning, and inductive reasoning. We implement a number of techniques and heuristics and evaluate them within the Vampire theorem prover. Our results show that these new techniques enjoy practical success on real-world problems.



We thank Andrew Reynolds for helping with obtaining CVC4 results.


  1. 1.
    Barrett, C., Fontaine, P., Tinelli, C.: The Satisfiability Modulo Theories Library (SMT-LIB) (2016).
  2. 2.
    Claessen, K., Johansson, M., Rosén, D., Smallbone, N.: Automating inductive proofs using theory exploration. In: Bonacina, M.P. (ed.) CADE 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7898, pp. 392–406. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Comon, H.: Inductionless induction. In: Handbook of Automated Reasoning (in 2 vols.), pp. 913–962 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cruanes, S.: Superposition with structural induction. In: Dixon, C., Finger, M. (eds.) FroCoS 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10483, pp. 172–188. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dixon, L., Fleuriot, J.: Higher order rippling in IsaPlanner. In: Slind, K., Bunker, A., Gopalakrishnan, G. (eds.) TPHOLs 2004. LNCS, vol. 3223, pp. 83–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta, A., Kovács, L., Kragl, B., Voronkov, A.: Extensional crisis and proving identity. In: Cassez, F., Raskin, J.-F. (eds.) ATVA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8837, pp. 185–200. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaufmann, M., Strother Moore, J., Manolios, P.: Computer-Aided Reasoning: An Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kersani, A., Peltier, N.: Combining superposition and induction: a practical realization. In: Fontaine, P., Ringeissen, C., Schmidt, R.A. (eds.) FroCoS 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8152, pp. 7–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kovács, L., Robillard, S., Voronkov, A.: Coming to terms with quantified reasoning. SIGPLAN Not. 52(1), 260–270 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kovács, L., Voronkov, A.: First-order theorem proving and Vampire. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 1–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leino, K.R.M.: Automating induction with an SMT solver. In: Kuncak, V., Rybalchenko, A. (eds.) VMCAI 2012. LNCS, vol. 7148, pp. 315–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nieuwenhuis, R., Rubio, A.: Paramodulation-based theorem proving. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, vol. I, chap. 7, pp. 371–443. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nonnengart, A., Weidenbach, C.: Computing small clause normal forms. In: Handbook of Automated Reasoning (in 2 vols.), pp. 335–367 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reger, G., Bjørner, N., Suda, M., Voronkov, A.: AVATAR modulo theories. In: 2nd Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence, GCAI 2016. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 41, pp. 39–52. EasyChair (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reger, G., Suda, M., Voronkov, A.: New techniques in clausal form generation. In: 2nd Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence, GCAI 2016. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 41, pp. 11–23. EasyChair (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reynolds, A., Kuncak, V.: Induction for SMT solvers. In: D’Souza, D., Lal, A., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) VMCAI 2015. LNCS, vol. 8931, pp. 80–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rybina, T., Voronkov, A.: A decision procedure for term algebras with queues. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 2(2), 155–181 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schulz, S.: E - a brainiac theorem prover. AI Commun. 15(2–3), 111–126 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sonnex, W., Drossopoulou, S., Eisenbach, S.: Zeno: an automated prover for properties of recursive data structures. In: Flanagan, C., König, B. (eds.) TACAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7214, pp. 407–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stump, A., Sutcliffe, G., Tinelli, C.: StarExec, a cross community logic solving service (2012).
  21. 21.
    Sutcliffe, G.: The TPTP problem library and associated infrastructure. J. Autom. Reason. 43(4), 337–362 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Voronkov, A.: AVATAR: the architecture for first-order theorem provers. In: Biere, A., Bloem, R. (eds.) CAV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8559, pp. 696–710. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wand, D.: Superposition: types and induction. (Superposition: types et induction). Ph.D. thesis, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weidenbach, C.: Combining superposition, sorts and splitting. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, vol. II, chap. 27, pp. 1965–2013. Elsevier Science (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ManchesterManchesterUK
  2. 2.EasyChairManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations