A Parallelized Theorem Prover for Interactive Theorem Proving David - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion A Parallelized Theorem Prover for Interactive Theorem Proving David L. Rager, Warren A. Hunt Jr., and Matt Kaufmann ragerdl@defthm.com, hunt@cs.utexas.edu, kaufmann@cs.utexas.edu July 26, 2013 1 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Project Goals Add parallelism primitives to formal language Parallelize main ACL2 proof process Provide proof debugging feedback more quickly Reduce time required to replay proofs 2 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Introduction to ACL2 Functional programming language Theorem Prover is written in this programming language Automated theorem prover for first-order logic with induction Used by AMD, Centaur Technologies, IBM, Intel, Kestrel Institute, Rockwell Collins and other industrial, academic, and government sites “... verified using Formal Methods techniques as specified by the EAL-7 level of the Common Criteria” 3 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) 4 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 0.1 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished 4 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 1 0.1 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished 4 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 0.0 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 1 0.1 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 1 2.0 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 1 2.0 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? Can first subgoal failure provide feedback sooner with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 13.1 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? Can first subgoal failure provide feedback sooner with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Warmup Example Time: 2.1 sec Goal (2 sec) Subgoal 2 (7 sec) Subgoal 1 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.2 (1 sec) Subgoal 2.1 (3 sec) Subgoal 1' (5 sec) Legend pending Subgoal 1'' (2 sec) unstarted active finished Can we make this proof go faster with parallel execution? Can first subgoal failure provide feedback sooner with parallel execution? 5 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Key Results Integrated parallelism primitives into the logic (and programming language) Many single-threaded features now thread-safe Use primitives to run theorem prover in parallel Created a robust implementation 99.9% of the 80,000 theorem regression suite passes 5.1x avg. speedup for 200 longest running theorems (32 cores) Some theorems obtain a ∼ 25.7x speedup At least a couple of users using subgoal-level parallelism on a daily basis 6 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Related Work Many prior multi-threading primitives for Lisp Multi-lisp, Parallel Lisp, Queue-based Multi-processing Lisp Not embedded in logic of a theorem prover Process-level parallelism: ACL2, SiCoTHEO, Isabelle/HOL Theorem-level parallelism: Nqthm and Isabelle/HOL Proof-checking parallelism: Isabelle/HOL We provide a stack of primitives embedded in the logic for an industrial-grade theorem prover, and we use these primitives to improve the interactive user’s experience by automatically attempting the proofs of subgoals in parallel. 7 / 26

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion Outline Introduction 1 Parallelism Primitives 2 Parallelizing ACL2 3 Evaluate Approach 4 Conclusion 5 8 / 26

A Parallelized Theorem Prover for Interactive Theorem Proving David - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Introduction Parallelism Primitives Parallelizing ACL2 Evaluate Approach Conclusion A Parallelized Theorem Prover for Interactive Theorem Proving David L. Rager, Warren A. Hunt Jr., and Matt Kaufmann ragerdl@defthm.com, hunt@cs.utexas.edu,

1 What is a Theorem Prover? What is a Theorem? Theorem: A formalizable statement which is

Meditation for a Theorem Prover Reasoning and Consciousness Teaching a Theorem Prover to let

The Abella Interactive Theorem Prover (System Description) Andrew Gacek Department of Computer

yet another nice and accurate interactive theorem prover (sufficiently similar, sufficiently

Lean Theorem Prover Tom van Bussel June 14, 2017 Goals It aims to bridge the gap between

A Self-Verifying Theorem Prover Jared Davis (advertisement by J Strother Moore)

Parallelizing an Interactive Theorem Prover Functional Programming and Proofs with ACL2 David L.

CML Theorem Prover Simon Foster 2nd Review Brussels, 21 November, 2013 Deliverable: D33.2 (m24)

Metamath Zero or: How to verify a verifier Mario Carneiro Carnegie Mellon University January 9,

Interactive Theorem Proving in Industry John Harrison Intel Corporation 16 April 2012 1 Milner

SMAC and XGBoost your Theorem Prover Edvard K. Holden Konstantin Korovin The University of

Batch Proving and Proof Scripting in PVS C esar A. Mu noz munoz@nianet.org National

Hygienic Macros for the ACL2 Theorem Prover Carl Eastlund Matthias Felleisen cce@ccs.neu.edu

Health Warning Principles, Techniques, Applications Theorem Proving is addictive Gerwin Klein

Clause Features for Theorem Prover Guidance uv 1 Josef Urban 1 Jan Jakub AITP19, Obergurgl,

Haskell: Compiler as Theorem-Prover Greg Price ( price ) 2007 Nov 19 code samples:

Visual theorem proving with the Incredible Proof Machine The idea Theorem Proving without

Tableau Theorem Prover for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic Larry Diehl Portland State

Tableau Theorem Prover for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic Larry Diehl Portland State

The Lean Theorem Prover Jeremy Avigad Department of Philosophy and Department of Mathematical

31. Stokes Theorem Stokes theorem is to Greens theorem, for the work done, as the

29. The divergence theorem Theorem 29.1 (Divergence Theorem; Gauss, Ostrogradsky) . Let S be a

A Multi-Engine Theorem Prover for a Description Logic of Typicality Laura Giordano 1 Valentina

Reachability Analysis in the KeYmaera X Theorem Prover SNR 2017 | Uppsala, Sweden | April 22,