Photo of Sean Holden
Dr Sean Holden
University Associate Professor
of Computer Science

Email

sbh11 at cl.cam.ac.uk

Please use the @cl form of address in preference to any other you may have. (Executive summary: the University decided to farm out its email provision to Micro$oft, with disasterous consequences. By using the correct email address your message should be handled by a proper, standards-compliant alternative, and therefore stands a much better chance of reaching me.)

Address (University)

University of Cambridge
Department of Computer Science and Technology
The Computer Laboratory
William Gates Building
15 JJ Thomson Avenue
Cambridge
CB3 0FD

Address (College)

Trinity College
Cambridge
CB2 1TQ

Phone

+44 (0)1223 763725 (University)
+44 (0)1223 338452 (College)

Orcid

0000-0001-7979-1148

Also available...

...on DBLP and Semantic Scholar.

If you want to study with me, please read the FAQs before doing anything else.

Connect++ logo.

Illustration of a Connect++ run.

Lean theorem provers are great: who doesn't want something implemented in a few lines of Prolog? However, they have some definite problems:

Connect++ is a connection prover implemented in C++ specifically with the aim of making it fast, and easy to incorporate new heuristics and machine learning methods.

Connect++ is currently a work in progress but my aim is to open-source it in 2023. Here's a bit of a teaser...

Step 1: present your problem in TPTP format

% % Problem from "Guiding Inference in Connection Tableaux % by Recurrent Neural Networks", Piotrowski and Urban, % CICM 2020. % cnf(c1, unknown, p(X)). cnf(c2, unknown, r(X,Y) | ~p(X) | q(Y) ). cnf(c3, unknown, s(X) | ~q(b) ). cnf(c4, unknown, ~s(X) | ~q(X) ). cnf(c5, unknown, ~q(X) | ~r(a,X) ). cnf(c6, unknown, ~r(a,X) | q(X) ).

You can find the specification for the TPTP format here.

Step 2: define a schedule

You can run Connect++ using a large number of options for parameters related to start clause selection, restriction of backtracking and so on.

The use of --schedule default on the command line directs Connect++ to use a straightforward schedule rather than fixed parameters. At present the default schedule looks like this:

sbh11@sbh11 resources % more default_schedule.txt 2 --pos-neg-start --complete 7 ; 60 --conjecture-start ; 20 --pos-neg-start --restrict-start ; 2 --conjecture-start --reorder 23 ; 2 --pos-neg-start --restrict-start --reorder 29 ; 2 --conjecture-start --reorder 37 ; 2 --pos-neg-start --restrict-start --reorder 41 ; 2 --conjecture-start --reorder 47 ; 0 --pos-neg-start --all-backtrack ; sbh11@sbh11 resources %

But you can specify a file containing your own schedule and Connect++ will parse it.

Step 3: run the prover

Unsurprisingly, it doesn't have too much trouble with the example quoted above:

Illustration of a Connect++ run.

Step 4: take a look at the proof

Illustration of a proof from Connect++.

The use of --latex on the command line directs Connect++ to produce a LaTeX representation of the first proof it finds.

Proofs tend to be wide, so this illustration is cropped. The full diagram is here.

Step 5: verify the proof's certificate

The use of --prolog on the command line directs Connect++ to produce a certificate for the first proof it finds.

This can be checked by a short Prolog program:

Start Clause: [-s(_13892),-q(_13892)] ---------- Left extension: depth = 2 C2 = [s(_13976),-q(b)] L2 = s(_13976) Unification OK. C = [-q(b)] P = [-s(_13892)] L = [] ---------- Left extension: depth = 3 C2 = [-r(a,_18196),q(_18196)] L2 = q(_18196) Unification OK. C = [-r(a,b)] P = [-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [] ---------- Left extension: depth = 4 C2 = [r(_18406,_18408),-p(_18406),q(_18408)] L2 = r(_18406,_18408) Unification OK. C = [q(b),-p(a)] P = [-r(a,b),-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [] ---------- Reduction: Lit resolved in path: -q(b) Unification OK. C = [-p(a)] P = [-r(a,b),-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [q(b)] ---------- Left extension: depth = 6 C2 = [p(_19182)] L2 = p(_19182) Unification OK. C = [] P = [-p(a),-r(a,b),-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [q(b)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 6 C = [] P = [-r(a,b),-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [-p(a),q(b)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 4 C = [] P = [-q(b),-s(_13892)] L = [-r(a,b)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 3 C = [] P = [-s(_13892)] L = [-q(b)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 2 C = [-q(_13892)] P = [] L = [-s(_13892)] ---------- Left extension: depth = 3 C2 = [-r(a,_19704),q(_19704)] L2 = q(_19704) Unification OK. C = [-r(a,_13892)] P = [-q(_13892)] L = [-s(_13892)] ---------- Left extension: depth = 4 C2 = [r(_19914,_19916),-p(_19914),q(_19916)] L2 = r(_19914,_19916) Unification OK. C = [q(_13892),-p(a)] P = [-r(a,_13892),-q(_13892)] L = [-s(_13892)] ---------- Reduction: Lit resolved in path: -q(_13892) Unification OK. C = [-p(a)] P = [-r(a,_13892),-q(_13892)] L = [q(_13892),-s(_13892)] ---------- Left extension: depth = 6 C2 = [p(_20232)] L2 = p(_20232) Unification OK. C = [] P = [-p(a),-r(a,_13892),-q(_13892)] L = [q(_13892),-s(_13892)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 6 C = [] P = [-r(a,_13892),-q(_13892)] L = [-p(a),q(_13892),-s(_13892)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 4 C = [] P = [-q(_13892)] L = [-r(a,_13892),-s(_13892)] ---------- Axiom ---------- Right extension: depth = 3 C = [] P = [] L = [-q(_13892),-s(_13892)] ---------- Axiom ---------- true .

Step 6: improve the process by adding some machine learning

This is the reason I wrote Connect++ in the first place! There is of course existing literature addressing this, but there's also plenty of room for new things.

Step 7: profit...

Still working on this part...

Latest news: