Frontiers of Combining Systems: 4th International Workshop, FroCoS 2002 Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, April 8–10, 2002 Proceedings

266 Pages·2002·2.69 MB·English

by  Greg Nelson (auth.)

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2309
SubseriesofLectureNotesinComputerScience
EditedbyJ.G.CarbonellandJ.Siekmann
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
EditedbyG.Goos,J.Hartmanis,andJ.vanLeeuwen
3
Berlin
Heidelberg
NewYork
Barcelona
HongKong
London
Milan
Paris
Tokyo
Alessandro Armando (Ed.)
Frontiers of
Combining Systems
4th International Workshop, FroCoS 2002
Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, April 8-10, 2002
Proceedings
1 3
SeriesEditors
JaimeG.Carbonell,CarnegieMellonUniversity,Pittsburgh,PA,USA
Jo¨rgSiekmann,UniversityofSaarland,Saarbru¨cken,Germany
VolumeEditor
AlessandroArmando
DIST–Universita`diGenova
VialeCausa13,15145Genova,Italy
E-mail:[email protected]
Cataloging-in-PublicationDataappliedfor
DieDeutscheBibliothek-CIP-Einheitsaufnahme
Frontiersofcombiningsystems:4thinternationalworkshop;proceedings/
FroCoS2002,SantaMargheritaLigure,Italy,April8-10,2002.Alessandro
Armando(ed.).-Berlin;Heidelberg;NewYork;Barcelona;HongKong;
London;Milan;Paris;Tokyo:Springer,2002
(Lecturenotesincomputerscience;Vol.2309:Lecturenotesin
artificialintelligence)
ISBN3-540-43381-3
CRSubjectClassification(1998):I.2.3,F.4.1,F.4
ISSN0302-9743
ISBN3-540-43381-3Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelbergNewYork
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.Allrightsarereserved,whetherthewholeorpartofthematerialis
concerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,re-useofillustrations,recitation,broadcasting,
reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherway,andstorageindatabanks.Duplicationofthispublication
orpartsthereofispermittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheGermanCopyrightLawofSeptember9,1965,
initscurrentversion,andpermissionforusemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer-Verlag.Violationsare
liableforprosecutionundertheGermanCopyrightLaw.
Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelbergNewYork
amemberofBertelsmannSpringerScience+BusinessMediaGmbH
http://www.springer.de
©Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2002
PrintedinGermany
Typesetting:Camera-readybyauthor,dataconversionbySteingra¨berSatztechnikGmbH,Heidelberg
Printedonacid-freepaper SPIN:10846555 06/3142 543210
Preface
This volume contains the proceedings of FroCoS 2002, the 4th International
Workshop on Frontiers of Combining Systems, held April 8-10, 2002 in Santa
Margherita Ligure (near Genova), Italy. Like its predecessors, organized in Mu-
nich (1996), Amsterdam (1998), and Nancy (2000), FroCoS 2002 offered a com-
monforumforthepresentationanddiscussionofresearchactivitiesonthecom-
bination and integration of systems in various areas of computer science, such
as logic, computation, program development and proof, artificial intelligence,
mechanical verification, and symbolic computation.
There were 35 submissions of high quality, authored by researchers from
countries including Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Finland, France, Germany, Italy,
Portugal,Spain,Singapore,UnitedKingdom,UnitedStatesofAmerica,andYu-
goslavia. All the submissions were thoroughly evaluated on the basis of at least
three referee reports, and an electronic program committee meeting was held
throughtheInternet.Theprogramcommitteeselected14researchcontributions.
The topics covered by the selected papers include: combination of logics, com-
bination of constraint solving techniques, combination of decision procedures,
combination problems in verification, modular properties of theorem proving,
integration of decision procedures and other solving processes into constraint
programming and deduction systems.
TheworkshopprogramwasenrichedbyfourinvitedtalksbyGregNelsonon
“Foundations of a Constraint-Based Illustrator”, Alessandro Cimatti on “Inte-
grating BDD-based and SAT-based Symbolic Model Checking”, Deepak Kapur
on“ARewriteRulebasedFrameworkforCombiningDecisionProcedures”,and
Tom F. Melham on “An Investigation into Software Architecture for Embedded
Proof Engines”, and one tutorial by Thom Fruehwirth and Slim Abdennadher
on “Reasoning with, about, and for Constraint Handling Rules”.
IwouldliketothankthemanypeoplewhomadeFroCoS2002possible.Iam
grateful to: the members of the program committee and the additional referees
named on the following pages for reviewing the papers in a very short time and
maintaining the very high standard of FroCoS workshops; the other members of
theFroCoSSteeringCommitteefortheiradviceandencouragement;theinvited
speakers;andlast,butbynomeansleast,SilvioRaniseforhandlingthesoftware
for our web-based reviewing procedure and Luca Compagna for his help in the
local organization of the workshop.
January 2002 Alessandro Armando
VI Organization
Workshop Chair
Alessandro Armando (DIST, University of Genova)
Program Committee
Alessandro Armando (U. Genova) Michael Kohlhase (CMU)
David Basin (U. Freiburg) ChristopheRingeissen(LORIANancy)
Frederic Benhamou (U. Nantes) Michael Rusinowitch (LORIA Nancy)
Jacques Calmet (U. Karlsruhe) Klaus Schulz (LMU Mu¨nchen)
Giorgio Delzanno (U. Genova) Roberto Sebastiani (U. Trento)
Bernhard Gramlich (T.U. Wien) Cesare Tinelli (U. Iowa)
Deepak Kapur (U. New Mexico) Luca Vigano` (U. Freiburg)
H´el`ene Kirchner (LORIA Nancy) Frank Wolter (U. Leipzig)
Local Organization
Alessandro Armando
Luca Compagna
Silvio Ranise
Additional Reviewers
Rafael Accorsi Paolo Giorgini Julien Musset
Marco Aiello Isabelle Gnaedig Silvio Ranise
Alexander Bockmayr Fr´ed´eric Goualard Michel Rueher
Chad E. Brown Laurent Granvilliers Luciano Serafini
Walter A. Carnielli Timothy J Hickey Frieder Stolzenburg
Luca Compagna Dieter Hutter Juergen Stuber
Alessandro Coglio Franc¸ois Lamarche Ashish Tiwari
Pasquale Delucia Steffen Lange Heinrich Wansing
Eric Domenjoud Francisco Lopez-Fraguas Michael Zakharyaschev
Hubert Dubois Michael Marte Hantao Zhang
Chiara Ghidini Richard Mayr
Silvio Ghilardi Eric Monfroy
Sponsoring Institutions
University of Genova
Dipartimento di Informatica, Sistemistica e Telematica (DIST), University of
Genova
Table of Contents
Foundations of a Constraint-Based Illustrator ......................... 1
Greg Nelson
Integrating Hol-Casl into the Development Graph Manager Maya...... 2
Serge Autexier, Till Mossakowski
Monads and Modularity ............................................ 18
Christoph Lu¨th, Neil Ghani
A Modular Approach to Proving Confluence........................... 33
Michael Marte
Integrating BDD-Based and SAT-Based Symbolic Model Checking ....... 49
Alessandro Cimatti, Enrico Giunchiglia, Marco Pistore, Marco Roveri,
Roberto Sebastiani, Armando Tacchella
Heuristics for Efficient Manipulation of Composite Constraints........... 57
Tuba Yavuz-Kahveci, Tevfik Bultan
Constraint-Based Model Checking
for Parameterized Synchronous Systems .............................. 72
Giorgio Delzanno
A Rewrite Rule Based Framework for Combining Decision Procedures .... 87
Deepak Kapur
Combining Sets with Integers........................................ 103
Calogero G. Zarba
Solving Nonlinear Equations
by Abstraction, Gaussian Elimination, and Interval Methods ............ 117
Martine Ceberio, Laurent Granvilliers
A Generalization of Shostak’s Method for Combining Decision Procedures. 132
Clark W. Barrett, David L. Dill, Aaron Stump
Combining Relational Algebra, SQL, and Constraint Programming ...... 147
Marco Cadoli, Toni Mancini
Computational Complexity of Propositional Linear Temporal Logics
Based on Qualitative Spatial or Temporal Reasoning ................... 162
Philippe Balbiani, Jean-Franc¸ois Condotta
Exploiting Constraints for Domain Managing in CLP(FD) .............. 177
Marco Gavanelli, Evelina Lamma, Paola Mello, Michela Milano
VIII Table of Contents
Tutorial: Reasoning with, about and for Constraint Handling Rules ...... 192
Thom Fruehwirth, Slim Abdennadher
Prosper. An Investigation into Software Architecture
for Embedded Proof Engines ........................................ 193
T.F. Melham
Constraint-Lambda Calculi.......................................... 207
Matthias H¨olzl, John N. Crossley
Labelled Deduction over Algebras of Truth-Values...................... 222
Joa˜o Rasga, Am´ılcar Sernadas, Cristina Sernadas, Luca Vigano`
A Temporal × Modal Approach
to the Definability of Properties of Functions .......................... 239
Alfredo Burrieza, Inma P. de Guzma´n
Author Index...................................................... 255
Foundations of a Constraint-Based Illustrator
Greg Nelson
COMPAQ Systems Research Center
130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Abstract. The talk describes some of the formal foundations of Juno-
2,aconstraint-basedgraphicalillustratorimplementedbyAllanHeydon
and Greg Nelson and available over the web in source form.
The first idea underlying Juno-2 is that constraint-based programming
isobtainedfromordinaryimperativeprogrammingnotbyaddingafea-
turebutbysubtractingarestriction:specificallybydroppingthelawof
the excluded miracle from the calculus of guarded commands of Edsger
W. Dijkstra. Dropping this law introduces “partial commands” (some-
times called “miracles”), which, when combined with conventional local
variable introductions (”VAR statements”) creates a highly principled
constraintsolvingprimitivethatisbeautifullyorthogonaltotheconven-
tional imperative features of the language.
The second idea is that the “combination of decision procedures tech-
nique”thathasbeenwidelyusedintheautomatictheorem-provingcom-
munity for the last two decades can also be used to combine constraint
solversfortwologicaltheoriesintoasingleconstraintsolverforthecom-
binationofthetheories.Juno-2usesthisideatocombineasimplesolver
forthetheoryofapairingfunction(whichamountsonlytoanimplemen-
tationofunificationclosure)withasophisticatednumericalsolverforthe
theory of the real numbers to produce a powerful constraint solver that
is useful for producing accurate technical illustrations and animations.
The talk will include a demonstration of Juno-2, weather permitting.
References
1. Allan Heydon and Greg Nelson. The Juno-2 Contraint-based Drawing Editor. Re-
searchReport131a.DigitalEquipmentCorporationSystemsResearchCenter,Palo
Alto, CA 1994.
2. The Juno-2 Home Page. http://research.compaq.com/SRC/juno-2
3. Greg Nelson. Juno, A Constraint-based Graphics System. In Proceedings of the
ACM Siggraph conference, pp 235–43, July 1985.
4. GregNelson. AGeneralizationofDijkstra’sCalculus.ACMTOPLAS11(4).Octo-
ber 1989, pp 517–61.
5. Greg Nelson. Combining Satisfiability Pocedures by Equality-sharing. In “Au-
tomatic Theorem Proving: after 25 years” edited by W. W. Bledsoe and D. W.
Loveland. (vol 29 of “Contemporary Mathematics”) American Mathematical Soci-
ety 1983. pp 201–11.
A.Armando(Ed.):FroCoS2002,LNAI2309,p.1,2002.
(cid:1)c Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2002
Integrating Hol-Casl
into the Development Graph Manager Maya
Serge Autexier1 and Till Mossakowski2
1 FR 6.2 Informatik, Saarland University,
P.O. Box 15 11 50, D 66041 Saarbru¨cken,
[email protected], Fax: [phone]
2 BISS, University of Bremen,
P.O. Box 330 440, D 28334 Bremen,
[email protected], Fax: [phone]
Abstract. FortherecentlydevelopedspecificationlanguageCasl,there
exist two different kinds of proof support: While HOL-Casl has its
strength in proofs about specifications in-the-small, Maya has been de-
signed for management of proofs in (Casl) specifications in-the-large,
within an evolutionary formal software development process involving
changesofspecifications.Inthiswork,wediscussourintegrationofHOL-
CaslandMayaintoapowerfulsystemprovidingtoolsupportforCasl,
whichwillalsoserveasabasisfortheintegrationoffurtherprooftools.
1 Introduction
The specification of large software systems is only manageable if specifications
are built in a structured manner. Specification languages, like Casl [4], provide
various mechanisms to combine basic specifications to structured specifications.
Analogously, verification tools must be able to represent the logical content of
specifications in a structured way. This needs to be more than the pure logical
contentofthespecification,sincethestatus,provenoropen,ofproofobligations
must be represented in order to keep the whole development in a consistent
state. Attempts to prove some proof obligation may fail, revealing errors in the
specification,whichissubsequentlychanged.Hencespecificationandverification
of software are intertwined, until we finally obtain a version of the specification,
whoseproofobligationscanallbeproved.Inpractice,itisindispensabletodeal
in an efficient manner with the effects of correcting flaws in the specification.
This is mainly to be able to determine which proofs remain valid, since a lot of
proof effort, i.e. development time, has gone into creating those proofs.
Industrial strength formal software development systems like VSE [9] have
been designed to deal with the evolutionary character of the software develop-
ment process. The main differences between those systems and usual theorem
proversisontheonehandthattheyaccommodatetheneedtoprovidetoolsup-
port to exploit the structure of specifications to ease their verification. On the
otherhand,theyprovidetoolsupporttoadministratethestatusofthedevelop-
ment. The development graph manager Maya [13,8] has been designed to make
A.Armando(Ed.):FroCoS2002,LNAI2309,pp.2–17,2002.
(cid:1)c Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2002