Skip to main content

SAT Solving for Argument Filterings

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 4246))

Abstract

This paper introduces a propositional encoding for lexicographic path orders in connection with dependency pairs. This facilitates the application of SAT solvers for termination analysis of term rewrite systems based on the dependency pair method. We address two main inter-related issues and encode them as satisfiability problems of propositional formulas that can be efficiently handled by SAT solving: (1) the combined search for a lexicographic path order together with an argument filtering to orient a set of inequalities; and (2) how the choice of the argument filtering influences the set of inequalities that have to be oriented. We have implemented our contributions in the termination prover AProVE. Extensive experiments show that by our encoding and the application of SAT solvers one obtains speedups in orders of magnitude as well as increased termination proving power.

Supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG under grant GI 274/5-1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Annual International Competition of Termination Tools, http://www.lri.fr/~marche/termination-competition

  2. Arts, T., Giesl, J.: Termination of term rewriting using dependency pairs. Theoretical Computer Science 236, 133–178 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Borralleras, C.: Ordering-based methods for proving termination automatically. PhD thesis, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Codish, M., Lagoon, V., Stuckey, P.J.: Solving partial order constraints for LPO termination. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) RTA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4098, pp. 4–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Comon, H., Narendran, P., Nieuwenhuis, R., Rusinowitch, M.: Decision problems in ordered rewriting. In: Proc. LICS 1998, pp. 276–286 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dershowitz, N.: Termination of rewriting. J. Symb. Comput 3(1,2), 69–116 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. 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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Empirical evaluation of “SAT Solving for Argument Filterings”, http://aprove.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/eval/SATLPO

  10. Genet, T., Gnaedig, I.: Termination proofs using GPO ordering constraints with shared term data structure. In: Bidoit, M., Dauchet, M. (eds.) CAAP 1997, FASE 1997, and TAPSOFT 1997. LNCS, vol. 1214, pp. 249–260. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Improving dependency pairs. In: Y. Vardi, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2003. LNCS, vol. 2850, pp. 165–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P.: The dependency pair framework: Combining techniques for automated termination proofs. In: Baader, F., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3452, pp. 301–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Giesl, J., Thiemann, R., Schneider-Kamp, P.: Proving and disproving termination of higher-order functions. In: Gramlich, B. (ed.) FroCos 2005. LNCS, vol. 3717, pp. 216–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Giesl, J., Schneider-Kamp, P., Thiemann, R.: AProVE 1.2: Automatic termination proofs in the DP framework. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4130, pp. 281–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Tsukuba Termination Tool. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) RTA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2706, pp. 311–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Dependency pairs revisited. In: van Oostrom, V. (ed.) RTA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3091, pp. 249–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Automating the dependency pair method. Information and Computation 199(1,2), 172–199 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Tyrolean Termination Tool. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, pp. 175–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Kamin, S., Lévy, J.J.: Two generalizations of the recursive path ordering. University of Illinois, IL, USA (1980) (Unpublished Manuscript)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kurihara, M., Kondo, H.: Efficient BDD encodings for partial order constraints with application to expert systems in software verification. In: Orchard, B., Yang, C., Ali, M. (eds.) IEA/AIE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3029, pp. 827–837. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Kusakari, K., Nakamura, M., Toyama, Y.: Argument filtering transformation. In: Nadathur, G. (ed.) PPDP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1702, pp. 47–61. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. SAT4J satisfiability library for Java, http://www.sat4j.org

  23. Thiemann, R., Giesl, J., Schneider-Kamp, P.: Improved modular termination proofs using dependency pairs. In: Basin, D., Rusinowitch, M. (eds.) IJCAR 2004. LNCS, vol. 3097, pp. 75–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Tseitin, G.: On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. In: Studies in Constructive Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, pp. 115–125 (1968); Reprinted in J. Siekmann and G. Wrightson (eds.) Automation of Reasoning, vol. 2, pp. 466–483. Springer, Heidelberg (1983)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Codish, M., Schneider–Kamp, P., Lagoon, V., Thiemann, R., Giesl, J. (2006). SAT Solving for Argument Filterings. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds) Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning. LPAR 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4246. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11916277_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11916277_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-48281-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-48282-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics