Separating the Wheat from the Chaff: Understanding (In-)Completeness of Proof Mechanisms for Separation Logic with Inductive Definitions
Neta Elad, Adithya Murali, Sharon Shoham
摘要
For over two decades Separation Logic has enjoyed its unique position as arguably the most popular framework for reasoning about heap-manipulating programs, as well as reasoning about shared resources and permissions. Separation Logic is often extended to include inductively-defined predicates, interpreted as least fixpoints, to form what is known as Separation Logic with Inductive Definitions (SLID). These inductive predicates are used to describe unbounded data-structures in the heap and to verify key properties thereof. Many theoretical and practical advances have been made in developing automated proof mechanisms for SLID, but by their very nature these mechanisms are imperfect, and a deeper understanding of their failures is desired. As expressive as Separation Logic is, it is not surprising that it is incomplete: there is no procedure that will provide a proof for all valid entailments in Separation Logic. In fact, at its very core, Separation Logic contains several sources of incompleteness that defy automated reasoning.
In this paper we study these sources of incompleteness and how they relate to failures of proof mechanisms of SLID. We contextualize SLID within a larger, relaxed logic, that we call Weak Separation Logic (WSL). We prove that unlike SLID, WSL enjoys completeness for a non-trivial fragment of quantified entailments with background theories and inductive definitions, via a reduction to first-order logic (FOL). Moreover, we show that the ubiquitous fold/unfold proof mechanism, which is unsurprisingly incomplete for SLID, does constitute a sound and complete proof mechanism of WSL, for theory-free, quantifier-free entailments with inductive definitions. In some sense, this shows that WSL is the natural logic of such proof mechanisms. Through this contextualization of SLID within WSL, we understand proof failures as stemming from rogue, nonstandard models, that exist within the class of models considered by WSL, but do not adhere to the stricter requirements of SLID. These rogue models are typically infinite, and we use the recently proposed formalism of symbolic structures to represent and automatically find them.
We present a prototype tool that implements the encoding of WSL to FOL and test it on an existing benchmark, which contains over 700 quantified entailment problems with inductive definitions, a third of which also contain background theories. Our tool is able to find counter-models to many of the examples, and we provide a partial taxonomy of the rogue models, shedding some light on real-world proof failures.
问问这篇 Paper
智能体会读完全文。
Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了最后一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。
它引用的顶会 Paper5
- Verification Algorithms for Automated Separation Logic VerifiersMarco Eilers, Malte Schwerhoff, Peter MüllerCAV 2024 · 被引用 5 次
- An Infinite Needle in a Finite Haystack: Finding Infinite Counter-Models in Deductive VerificationNeta Elad, Oded Padon, Sharon ShohamPOPL 2024 · 被引用 4 次
- Complete First-Order Reasoning for Properties of Functional ProgramsAdithya Murali, Lucas Peña, Ranjit Jhala, P. MadhusudanOOPSLA 2023 · 被引用 3 次
- Axe 'Em: Eliminating Spurious States with Induction AxiomsNeta Elad, Sharon ShohamPOPL 2025 · 被引用 1 次
- FO-Complete Program Verification for Heap LogicsAdithya Murali, Hrishikesh Balakrishnan, Aaron Councilman, P. MadhusudanOOPSLA 2025
相关 Paper
- A concurrent program logic with a future and historyRoland Meyer, Thomas Wies, Sebastian WolffOOPSLA 2022 · 被引用 9 次
- Fractional resources in unbounded separation logicThibault Dardinier, Peter Müller, Alexander J. SummersOOPSLA 2022 · 被引用 5 次
- Model-guided synthesis of inductive lemmas for FOL with least fixpointsAdithya Murali, Lucas Peña, Eion Blanchard, Christof Löding 等OOPSLA 2022 · 被引用 11 次
- Generically Automating Separation Logic by Functors, Homomorphisms, and ModulesQiyuan Xu, David Sanán, Zhe Hou, Xiaokun Luan 等POPL 2025
- Towards a unified proof framework for automated fixpoint reasoning using matching logicXiaohong Chen, Minh-Thai Trinh, Nishant Rodrigues, Lucas Peña 等OOPSLA 2020 · 被引用 7 次
