Abstract
This paper describes an evaluation of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems taken from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems. Principally, the problems are translated to higher-order logic in the TPTP language using an embedding approach, and solved using higher-order logic ATP systems. Additionally, the results from native modal logic ATP systems are considered, and compared with those from the embedding approach. The findings are that the embedding process is reliable and successful, the choice of backend ATP system can significantly impact the performance of the embedding approach, native modal logic ATP systems outperform the embedding approach, and the embedding approach can cope with a wider range modal logics than the native modal systems considered.
T. Scholl–Independent researcher.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
All the problems and results are available from the QMLTP directory of the TPTP World’s non-classical logic Github repository at
- 2.
- 3.
The syntax format of QMLTP is not introduced here. For uniformity, the TPTP syntax standards and the extensions to modal logic are introduced in Sect. 3.
- 4.
The development of TPTP World standards for writing ATP solutions beyond common derivations and models is still necessary; see, e.g., [37].
- 5.
- 6.
This slightly unusual form was chosen to reflect the first-order functional style, but by making the application explicit the formulae can be parsed in Prolog – a long standing principle of the TPTP languages [51].
- 7.
The property names presented in this work supersede those used in earlier works. The $designation used to be called $constants, while the $domains used to be called $quantification.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
The automation pipeline presented here does support multi-modal logic reasoning. However, during experimentation, it was revealed that the expected results documented in the QMLTP library for the multi-modal MML problem domain seem to be erroneous, and they have been excluded from the evaluation. These issues will be assessed in more detail in future work.
- 11.
As noted in Sect. 5.1, there are no expected results for decreasing domains (not documented in the QMLTP), and for some QMLTP problems it is unknown whether or not they are theorems with a given combination of properties.
- 12.
The strength of a logic refers to the set of theorems of the particular logic, i.e., a logic \(L_1\) is stronger than a logic \(L_2\) if \(\textrm{theorems}(L_2) \subseteq \textrm{theorems}(L_1)\). This is not a complete nor linear order but rather a partial order relation, e.g., as visualized by the modal logic cube [22]. For example, S5 is stronger than K, assuming the other logic parameters (domain semantics, etc.) remain the same.
- 13.
The conditions stated in [40] for “presenting results of modal ATP systems based on the QMLTP library” say that “no part of the problems may be modified”. As such the results presented in this paper for the corrected versions of the QMLTP problems cannot be called “results for problems from the QMLTP”. But pragmatically, the results on the set of (corrected) problems are comparable with the results on the original QMLTP problems.
References
Andrews, P.: General models and extensionality. J. Symbolic Logic 37(2), 395–397 (1972)
Barbosa, H., et al.: cvc5: a versatile and industrial-strength SMT solver. In: TACAS 2022. LNCS, vol. 13243, pp. 415–442. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99524-9_24
Barcan, R.: A functional calculus of first order based on strict implication. J. Symbolic Logic 11, 1–16 (1946)
Bentkamp, A., Blanchette, J., Tourret, S., Vukmirović, P.: Superposition for full higher-order logic. In: Platzer, A., Sutcliffe, G. (eds.) CADE 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12699, pp. 396–412. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79876-5_23
Benzmüller, C., Brown, C., Kohlhase, M.: Higher-order semantics and extensionality. J. Symbolic Logic 69(4), 1027–1088 (2004)
Benzmüller, C., Miller, D.: Automation of higher-order logic. In: Gabbay, D., Siekmann, J., Woods, J. (eds.) Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 9 - Computational Logic, pp. 215–254. North Holland, Elsevier (2014)
Benzmüller, C., Otten, J., Raths, T.: Implementing and evaluating provers for first-order modal logics. In: De Raedt, L., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 163–168. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press (2012)
Benzmüller, C., Paulson, L.: Quantified multimodal logics in simple type theory. Logica Univ. 7(1), 7–20 (2013)
Benzmüller, C., Raths, T.: HOL based first-order modal logic provers. In: McMillan, K., Middeldorp, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2013. LNCS, vol. 8312, pp. 127–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45221-5_9
Benzmüller, C., Woltzenlogel Paleo, B.: The inconsistency in gödel’s ontological argument: a success story for AI in metaphysics. In: Kambhampati, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 936–942. AAAI Press (2016)
Bhayat, A., Reger, G.: A combinator-based superposition calculus for higher-order logic. In: Peltier, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) IJCAR 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12166, pp. 278–296. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51074-9_16
Blackburn, P., van Benthem, J., Wolther, F.: Handbook of Modal Logic. No. 3 in Studies in Logic and Practical Reasoning, Elsevier Science (2006)
Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., Venema, Y.: Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
Blanchette, J.C., Nipkow, T.: Nitpick: a counterexample generator for higher-order logic based on a relational model finder. In: Kaufmann, M., Paulson, L.C. (eds.) ITP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6172, pp. 131–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14052-5_11
Brown, C.E.: Satallax: an automatic higher-order prover. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) IJCAR 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7364, pp. 111–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31365-3_11
del Cerro, L.F., Fauthoux, D., Gasquet, O., Herzig, A., Longin, D., Massacci, F.: Lotrec: the generic tableau prover for modal and description logics. In: Goré, R., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) IJCAR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2083, pp. 453–458. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45744-5_38
Church, A.: A formulation of the simple theory of types. J. Symbolic Logic 5, 56–68 (1940)
van Ditmarsch, H., Halpern, J., van der Hoek, W., Kooi, B.: Handbook of Epistemic Logic. College Publications, Norcross (2015)
Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: MiniSat - a SAT solver with conflict-clause minimization. In: Bacchus, F., Walsh, T. (eds.) Posters of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (2005)
Fitting, M., Mendelsohn, R.: First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer (1998)
Frege, F.: Grundgesetze der Arithmetik. Jena (1893 1903
Garson, J.: Modal Logic. In: Zalta, E. (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, Stanford (2018)
Gibbons, J., Wu, N.: Folding domain-specific languages: deep and shallow embeddings (Functional Pearl). In: Jeuring, J., Chakravarty, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, pp. 339–347. ACM Press (2014)
Gleißner, T.: A Framework for Higher-Order Modal Logic Theorem Proving. Master’s thesis, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany (2019)
Gleißner, T., Steen, A., Benzmüller, C.: Theorem provers for every normal modal logic. In: Eiter, T., Sands, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning, pp. 14–30. No. 46 in EPiC Series in Computing, EasyChair Publications (2017)
Gordon, M., Melham, T.: Introduction to HOL, a Theorem Proving Environment for Higher Order Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)
Harrison, J.: HOL light: a tutorial introduction. In: Srivas, M., Camilleri, A. (eds.) FMCAD 1996. LNCS, vol. 1166, pp. 265–269. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0031814
Henkin, L.: Completeness in the theory of types. J. Symbolic Logic 15(2), 81–91 (1950)
Hustadt, U., Schmidt, R.A.: MSPASS: modal reasoning by translation and first-order resolution. In: Dyckhoff, R. (ed.) TABLEAUX 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1847, pp. 67–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/10722086_7
Kaliszyk, C., Urban, J.: HOL(y)Hammer: online ATP service for HOL Light (2013). arXiv:1309.4962
Kripke, S.: Semantical considerations on modal logic. Acta Philosophica Fennica 16, 83–94 (1963)
Lindblad, F.: A focused sequent calculus for higher-order logic. In: Demri, S., Kapur, D., Weidenbach, C. (eds.) IJCAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8562, pp. 61–75. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08587-6_5
Nalon, C., Hustadt, U., Dixon, C.: KSP: architecture, refinements, strategies and experiments. J. Autom. Reasoning 64(3), 461–484 (2020)
Nipkow, T., Wenzel, M., Paulson, L.C. (eds.): : 5. the rules of the game. In: Isabelle/HOL. LNCS, vol. 2283, pp. 67–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45949-9_5
Otten, J.: MleanCoP: a connection prover for first-order modal logic. In: Demri, S., Kapur, D., Weidenbach, C. (eds.) IJCAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8562, pp. 269–276. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08587-6_20
Otten, J.: The nanoCoP 2.0 connection provers for classical, intuitionistic and modal logics. In: Das, A., Negri, S. (eds.) TABLEAUX 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12842, pp. 236–249. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86059-2_14
Otten, J., Sutcliffe, G.: Using the TPTP language for representing derivations in tableau and connection Calculi. In: Konev, B., Schmidt, R., Schulz, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Practical Aspects of Automated Reasoning, 5th International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, pp. 90–100 (2010)
Owre, S., Rajan, S., Rushby, J.M., Shankar, N., Srivas, M.: PVS: combining specification, proof checking, and model checking. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CAV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 411–414. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61474-5_91
Papacchini, F., Nalon, C., Hustadt, U., Dixon, C.: Efficient local reductions to basic modal logic. In: Platzer, A., Sutcliffe, G. (eds.) CADE 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12699, pp. 76–92. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79876-5_5
Raths, T., Otten, J.: The QMLTP problem library for first-order modal logics. In: Gramlich, B., Miller, D., Sattler, U. (eds.) IJCAR 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7364, pp. 454–461. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31365-3_35
Schulz, S., Cruanes, S., Vukmirović, P.: Faster, higher, stronger: E 2.3. In: Fontaine, P. (ed.) CADE 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11716, pp. 495–507. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29436-6_29
Siekmann, J., Benzmüller, C., Autexier, S.: Computer Supported Mathematics with OMEGA. J. Appl. Logic 4(4), 533–559 (2006)
Steen, A.: An extensible logic embedding tool for lightweight non-classical reasoning (2022). arXiv:2203.12352
Steen, A.: logic-embedding v1.6 (2022). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5913216
Steen, A., Benzmüller, C.: The higher-order prover leo-III. In: Galmiche, D., Schulz, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) IJCAR 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10900, pp. 108–116. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94205-6_8
Stump, A., Sutcliffe, G., Tinelli, C.: StarExec: a cross-community infrastructure for logic solving. In: Demri, S., Kapur, D., Weidenbach, C. (eds.) IJCAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8562, pp. 367–373. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08587-6_28
Sutcliffe, G.: TPTP, TSTP, CASC, etc. In: Diekert, V., Volkov, M.V., Voronkov, A. (eds.) CSR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4649, pp. 6–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74510-5_4
Sutcliffe, G.: The TPTP problem library and associated infrastructure. From CNF to TH0, TPTP v6.4.0. J. Autom. Reason. 59(4), 483–502 (2017)
Sutcliffe, G.: The logic languages of the TPTP World. Logic J. IGPL (2022). https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzac068
Sutcliffe, G., Benzmüller, C.: Automated reasoning in higher-order logic using the TPTP THF infrastructure. J. Formalized Reasoning 3(1), 1–27 (2010)
Sutcliffe, G., Zimmer, J., Schulz, S.: TSTP data-exchange formats for automated theorem proving tools. In: Zhang, W., Sorge, V. (eds.) Distributed Constraint Problem Solving and Reasoning in Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 201–215. No. 112 in Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press (2004)
Thion, V., Cerrito, S., Mayer, M.C.: A general theorem prover for quantified modal logics. In: Egly, U., Fermüller, C.G. (eds.) TABLEAUX 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2381, pp. 266–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45616-3_19
Tishkovsky, D., Schmidt, R.A., Khodadadi, M.: The tableau prover generator MetTeL2. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds.) JELIA 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7519, pp. 492–495. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_41
Vukmirović, P., Bentkamp, A., Blanchette, J., Cruanes, S., Nummelin, V., Tourret, S.: Making higher-order superposition work. In: Platzer, A., Sutcliffe, G. (eds.) CADE 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12699, pp. 415–432. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79876-5_24
Weidenbach, C., Dimova, D., Fietzke, A., Kumar, R., Suda, M., Wischnewski, P.: SPASS version 3.5. In: Schmidt, R.A. (ed.) CADE 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5663, pp. 140–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02959-2_10
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Steen, A., Sutcliffe, G., Scholl, T., Benzmüller, C. (2023). Solving Modal Logic Problems by Translation to Higher-Order Logic. In: Herzig, A., Luo, J., Pardo, P. (eds) Logic and Argumentation. CLAR 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 14156. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40875-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40875-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40874-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-40875-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)