Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance uv 1 Josef Urban 1 Jan Jakub - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance uv 1 Josef Urban 1 Jan Jakub˚ AITP’18, Aussois, 29th March 2018 1 Czech Technical University in Prague Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 1 / 29

Outline ATPs & Given Clauses Enigma Models Enhanced Features Experiments with Boosting & Looping Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 2 / 29

Given Clause Loop Paradigm Problem representation • first order clauses (ex. “ x “ 0 _ � P p f p x , x qq ”) • posed for proof by contradiction Given an initial set C of clauses and a set of inference rules, find a derivation of the empty clause (for example, by the resolution of clauses with conflicting literals L and � L ). Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 4 / 29

Basic Loop Proc = {} Unproc = all available clauses while (no proof found) { select a given clause C from Unproc move C from Unproc to Proc apply inference rules to C and Proc put inferred clauses to Unproc } Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 5 / 29

Clause Selection Heuristics in E Prover • E Prover has several pre-defined clause weight functions. (and others can be easily implemented) • Each weight function assigns a real number to a clause. • Clause with the smallest weight is selected. Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 6 / 29

E Prover Strategy • E strategy = E parameters influencing proof search (term ordering, literal selection, clause splitting, . . . ) • Weight functions to guide given clause selection. • Several clause weight functions can be combined together: (10 * ClauseWeight1(10,0.1,...) , 1 * ClauseWeight2(...) , 20 * ClauseWeight3(...) ) Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 7 / 29

Enigma Basics • Idea: Use fast linear classifier to guide given clause selection! • ENIGMA stands for. . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 9 / 29

Enigma Basics • Idea: Use fast linear classifier to guide given clause selection! • ENIGMA stands for. . . Efficient learNing-based Inference Guiding MAchine Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 9 / 29

LIBLINEAR: Linear Classifier • LIBLINEAR: open source library 1 • input: positive and negative examples (float vectors) • output: model ( „ a vector of weights) • evaluation of a generic vector: dot product with the model 1 http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/liblinear/ Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 10 / 29

Clauses as Feature Vectors Consider the literal as a tree and simplify (sign, vars, skolems). ‘ “ “ f g Ñ f g x y sko 1 sko 2 f f d d x f Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 11 / 29

Clauses as Feature Vectors Features are descending paths of length 3 (triples of symbols). ‘ “ “ f g Ñ f g x y sko 1 sko 2 f f d d x f Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 11 / 29

Clauses as Feature Vectors Collect and enumerate all the features. Count the clause features. # feature count ‘ 1 ( ‘ ,=,a) 0 . . . . . . . . . “ 11 ( ‘ ,=,f) 1 f g 12 ( ‘ ,=,g) 1 13 (=,f, f ) 2 f f d d 14 (=,g, d ) 2 15 (g, d , f ) 1 f . . . . . . . . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 12 / 29

Clauses as Feature Vectors Take the counts as a feature vector. # feature count ‘ 1 ( ‘ ,=,a) 0 . . . . . . . . . “ 11 ( ‘ ,=,f) 1 f g 12 ( ‘ ,=,g) 1 13 (=,f, f ) 2 f f d d 14 (=,g, d ) 2 15 (g, d , f ) 1 f . . . . . . . . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 12 / 29

Enigma Model Construction 1. Collect training examples from E runs (useful/useless clauses). 2. Enumerate all the features ( π :: feature Ñ int). 3. Translate clauses to feature vectors. 4. Train a LIBLINEAR classifier ( w :: float | dom p π q| ). 5. Enigma model is E “ p π, w q . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 13 / 29

Given Clause Selection by Enigma We have Enigma model E “ p π, w q and a generated clause C . 1. Translate C to feature vector Φ C using π . 2. Compute prediction: $ 1 iff w ¨ Φ C ą 0 & weight 0 p C q “ 10 otherwise % 3. Combine prediction with clause length: weight p C q “ weight 0 p C q ` δ ˚ | C | Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 14 / 29

Enigma Given Clause Selection • We have implemented Enigma weight function in E. • Enigma model can be used alone to select a given clause: (1 * Enigma( E , δ ) ) • or in combination with other E weight functions: (23 * Enigma( E , δ ) , 3 * StandardWeight(...) , 20 * StephanWeight(...) ) Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 15 / 29

Conjecture Features • Enigma classifier E is independent on the goal conjecture! • Improvement: Extend Φ C with goal conjecture features. • Instead of vector Φ C take vector p Φ C , Φ G q . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 17 / 29

Conjecture Features and Prediction Rates (%) AIM train accuracy 10-fold cross-val data noconj conj noconj conj 84.7 84.6 84.6 84.5 simple 50-50 76.3 78.0 76.3 77.8 MZR train accuracy 10-fold cross-val data noconj conj noconj conj 92.2 95.0 90.8 93.9 simple 50-50 89.2 91.9 88.8 91.5 Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 18 / 29

Horizontal Features Function applications and arguments top-level symbols. # feature count ‘ 1 ( ‘ ,=,a) 0 . . . “ . . . . . . 100 “ p f , g q 1 f g 101 f pf , fq 1 f f d d 102 g pd , dq 1 103 dpfq 1 f . . . . . . . . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 19 / 29

Static Clause Features For a clause, its length and the number of pos./neg. literals. # feature count/val ‘ 103 dpfq 1 “ . . . . . . . . . f g 200 len 9 201 pos 1 f f d d 202 neg 0 . . . . . . f . . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 20 / 29

Static Symbol Features For each symbol, its count and maximum depth. # feature count/val ‘ 202 neg 0 . . . . . . . . . “ 300 # ‘ p f q 1 f g 301 # a p f q 0 . . . . . . . . . f f d d 310 % ‘ pfq 4 f 311 % a pfq 0 . . . . . . . . . Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 21 / 29

Boosting • Training data are uneven. • Usually we have more negative examples (cca 10 times). • Previously: Repeat positive examples 10 times. Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 23 / 29

Smarter Boosting 1. Collect training data. 2. Create classifier E “ p π, w q . 3. Compute prediction accuracy on the training data (using w ). 4. If p acc ` ą acc ´ q then finish. 5. Repeat misclassified positive clauses in the training data. 6. Goto 2. Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 24 / 29

Looping 1. Run E prover with strategy S on problems P . 2. Collect/extend training data. 3. Create classifier E “ p π, w q from the training data. 4. Construct strategies S 0 E and S E . 5. Evaluate S 0 E and S E on problems P . 6. Goto 2. Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 25 / 29

Experiments with Clustering • MPTP benchmarks (2079 problems from Mizar). • 10 E Prover strategies from auto mode (autos). • Problems are clustered into 33 articles/categories. • We train Enigma separately on all articles (for each S ). • We take best-performing strategies on each article. Jan Jakub˚ uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 26 / 29

Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance uv 1 Josef Urban 1 Jan Jakub - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance uv 1 Josef Urban 1 Jan Jakub AITP18, Aussois, 29th March 2018 1 Czech Technical University in Prague Jan Jakub uv, Josef Urban Enhancing ENIGMA Given Clause Guidance 1 / 29 Outline ATPs &

Neural ENIGMA Karel Chvalovsk Jan Jakubv Martin Suda Josef Urban Czech Technical

X Schedule 4 Transactional Charges Clause 9 Clause 10 2 RWE npower

Part II: Enhancing ATPs with Machine Learning Course Machine Learning and Reasoning 2020 MLR 2020

Rotor Machines and Enigma 1. The Introduction of Rotor Machines. 2. Arthur Scherbius and the

The The Enigma Enigma Machine Machine History of Computing December 6, 2006 Mike Koss

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

Supporting the Enigma Supporting the Enigma that is Autism that is Autism Peter Byrne 16 th

CHAMBERS OF TAX CONSULTANTS Clause by Clause Analysis and Reporting Requirements in Tax Audit

Breaking the WW2 German Enigma Historical APT Perspective Richard Brisson Email:

A) We would not have missed the train if we had got up earlier. 1. MAIN CLAUSE: 2. DEPENDENT

The Dormant Commerce Clause What is Interstate Commerce? Commerce Clause, U.S. Const. art. 1 8,

Introduction Clause exchange in parallel solvers Lazy clause exchange Experiments

Clause Size Reduction with all-UIP Learning Nick Feng and Fahiem Bacchus University of Toronto

3 day clause by clause discussions on GST Inter state transactions, Place of supply of services

MAY 24-27, 2019 | WESTON, FL C A O B ENIGMA Cup, is in its 2nd year of existence, after an

The Enigma Cipher Machine Kadri Hendla University of Tartu kadri h@ut.ee Research Seminar in

VOCABULARY OVERVIEW IF CLAUSE RELATIVE CLAUSE PRONOUNS 2 Smartphone use could

Relative Clause clause adds additional information to the noun in the sentence. 1 Direct

Top-down Definite Clause Proof Procedure Idea: search backward from a query to determine if it is

Grammatical markers and grammatical relations in the simple clause in Old French Nicolas

Getting Better Backjump Clauses By repeating this process, we will eventually obtain a clause

IND 105 LESSON 5 FAR 52.245-1 The Government Property Clause TLO 5 - Given a contract with the

Expressing adverbial relations in clause linkage with converbs: definitional and typological

Route map of our journey this evening Ciphers - coming of age The Enigma Machine Poles