We present an environment, benchmark, and deep learning driven automated theorem prover for higher-order logic. Higher-order interactive theorem provers enable the formalization of arbitrary mathematical theories and thereby present an interesting, open-ended challenge for deep learning. We provide an open-source framework based on the HOL Light theorem prover that can be used as a reinforcement learning environment. HOL Light comes with a broad coverage of basic mathematical theorems on calculus and the formal proof of the Kepler conjecture, from which we derive a challenging benchmark for automated reasoning. We also present a deep reinforcement learning driven automated theorem prover, DeepHOL, with strong initial results on this benchmark.
Earlier works on employing (non-deep) machine learning for theorem proving in general and for reasoning in large theories include @cite_11 @cite_23 @cite_4 @cite_36 @cite_32 @cite_25 @cite_16 @cite_31 @cite_30 @cite_42 @cite_37 @cite_6 @cite_41 @cite_39 @cite_9 @cite_27 @cite_29 . Recently, proposed a premise selection method utilizing deep graph embeddings.
@cite_30 @cite_37 @cite_4 @cite_36 @cite_41 @cite_9 @cite_42 @cite_29 @cite_32 @cite_6 @cite_39 @cite_27 @cite_23 @cite_31 @cite_16 @cite_25 @cite_11
1982239968 2962905782 2593925740 2296462965 2581336110 2097437276 1870229778 2509751917 2045254372 1964821516 2156433885 2466714650 8060374 2127812195 2005941052 1483885793 2114154044 2147650421 2619454468 2888460903
Smart premise selection is essential when using automated reasoning as a tool for large-theory formal proof development. This work develops learning-based premise selection in two ways. First, a fine-grained dependency analysis of existing high-level formal mathematical proofs is used to build a large knowledge base of proof dependencies, providing precise data for ATP-based re-verification and for training premise selection algorithms. Second, a new machine learning algorithm for premise selection based on kernel methods is proposed and implemented. To evaluate the impact of both techniques, a benchmark consisting of 2078 large-theory mathematical problems is constructed, extending the older MPTP Challenge benchmark. The combined effect of the techniques results in a 50 improvement on the benchmark over the state-of-the-art Vampire SInE system for automated reasoning in large theories. We study the effectiveness of neural sequence models for premise selection in automated theorem proving, a key bottleneck for progress in formalized mathematics. We propose a two stage approach for this task that yields good results for the premise selection task on the Mizar corpus while avoiding the hand-engineered features of existing state-of-the-art models. To our knowledge, this is the first time deep learning has been applied theorem proving on a large scale. Large computer-understandable proofs consist of millions of intermediate logical steps. The vast majority of such steps originate from manually selected and manually guided heuristics applied to intermediate goals. So far, machine learning has generally not been used to filter or generate these steps. In this paper, we introduce a new dataset based on Higher-Order Logic (HOL) proofs, for the purpose of developing new machine learning-based theorem-proving strategies. We make this dataset publicly available under the BSD license. We propose various machine learning tasks that can be performed on this dataset, and discuss their significance for theorem proving. We also benchmark a set of simple baseline machine learning models suited for the tasks (including logistic regression, convolutional neural networks and recurrent neural networks). The results of our baseline models show the promise of applying machine learning to HOL theorem proving. The success rates of automated theorem provers in large theories highly depend on the choice of given facts. Premise selection is the task of choosing a subset of given facts, which is most likely to lead to a successful automated deduction proof of a given conjecture. Premise selection can be viewed as a multi-label classification problem, where machine learning from related proofs turns out to currently be the most successful method. Random forests are a machine learning technique known to perform especially well on large datasets. In this paper, we evaluate random forest algorithms for premise selection. To deal with the specifics of automated reasoning, we propose a number of extensions to random forests, such as incremental learning, multi-path querying, depth weighting, feature IDF inverse document frequency, and integration of secondary classifiers in the tree leaves. With these extensions, we improve on the k-nearest neighbour algorithm both in terms of prediction quality and ATP performance. Deep learning techniques lie at the heart of several significant AI advances in recent years including object recognition and detection, image captioning, machine translation, speech recognition and synthesis, and playing the game of Go. Automated first-order theorem provers can aid in the formalization and verification of mathematical theorems and play a crucial role in program analysis, theory reasoning, security, interpolation, and system verification. Here we suggest deep learning based guidance in the proof search of the theorem prover E. We train and compare several deep neural network models on the traces of existing ATP proofs of Mizar statements and use them to select processed clauses during proof search. We give experimental evidence that with a hybrid, two-phase approach, deep learning based guidance can significantly reduce the average number of proof search steps while increasing the number of theorems proved. Using a few proof guidance strategies that leverage deep neural networks, we have found first-order proofs of 7.36 of the first-order logic translations of the Mizar Mathematical Library theorems that did not previously have ATP generated proofs. This increases the ratio of statements in the corpus with ATP generated proofs from 56 to 59 . In this paper, an overview of state-of-the-art techniques for premise selection in large theory mathematics is provided, and new premise selection techniques are introduced. Several evaluation metrics are introduced, compared and their appropriateness is discussed in the context of automated reasoning in large theory mathematics. The methods are evaluated on the MPTP2078 benchmark, a subset of the Mizar library, and a 10 improvement is obtained over the best method so far. Large formal mathematical knowledge bases encode considerable parts of advanced mathematics and exact science, allowing deep semantic computer assistance and verification of complicated theories down to the atomic logical rules. An essential part of automated reasoning over such large theories are methods learning selection of relevant knowledge from the thousands of proofs in the corpora. Such methods in turn rely on efficiently computable features characterizing the highly structured and inter-related mathematical statements. In this work we (i) propose novel semantic features characterizing the statements in such large semantic knowledge bases, (ii) propose and carry out their efficient implementation using deductive-AI data-structures such as substitution trees and discrimination nets, and (iii) show that they significantly improve the strength of existing knowledge selection methods and automated reasoning methods over the large formal knowledge bases. In particular, on a standard large-theory benchmark we improve the average predicted rank of a mathematical statement needed for a proof by 22 in comparison with state of the art. This allows us to prove 8 more theorems in comparison with state of the art. I propose a system for Automated Theorem Proving in higher order logic using deep learning and eschewing hand-constructed features. Holophrasm exploits the formalism of the Metamath language and explores partial proof trees using a neural-network-augmented bandit algorithm and a sequence-to-sequence model for action enumeration. The system proves 14 of its test theorems from Metamath's set.mm module. We use logical inference techniques for recognising textual entailment. As the performance of theorem proving turns out to be highly dependent on not readily available background knowledge, we incorporate model building, a technique borrowed from automated reasoning, and show that it is a useful robust method to approximate entailment. Finally, we use machine learning to combine these deep semantic analysis techniques with simple shallow word overlap; the resulting hybrid model achieves high accuracy on the RTE testset, given the state of the art. Our results also show that the different techniques that we employ perform very differently on some of the subsets of the RTE corpus and as a result, it is useful to use the nature of the dataset as a feature. Abstract Many AI problems, when formalized, reduce to evaluating the probability that a propositional expression is true. In this paper we show that this problem is computationally intractable even in surprisingly restricted cases and even if we settle for an approximation to this probability. We consider various methods used in approximate reasoning such as computing degree of belief and Bayesian belief networks, as well as reasoning techniques such as constraint satisfaction and knowledge compilation, that use approximation to avoid computational difficulties, and reduce them to model-counting problems over a propositional domain. We prove that counting satisfying assignments of propositional languages is intractable even for Horn and monotone formulae, and even when the size of clauses and number of occurrences of the variables are extremely limited. This should be contrasted with the case of deductive reasoning, where Horn theories and theories with binary clauses are distinguished by the existence of linear time satisfiability algorithms. What is even more surprising is that, as we show, even approximating the number of satisfying assignments (i.e., “approximating” approximate reasoning), is intractable for most of these restricted theories. We also identify some restricted classes of propositional formulae for which efficient algorithms for counting satisfying assignments can be given. The considerable mathematical knowledge encoded by the Flyspeck project is combined with external automated theorem provers (ATPs) and machine-learning premise selection methods trained on the Flyspeck proofs, producing an AI system capable of proving a wide range of mathematical conjectures automatically. The performance of this architecture is evaluated in a bootstrapping scenario emulating the development of Flyspeck from axioms to the last theorem, each time using only the previous theorems and proofs. It is shown that 39 of the 14185 theorems could be proved in a push-button mode (without any high-level advice and user interaction) in 30 seconds of real time on a fourteen-CPU workstation. The necessary work involves: (i) an implementation of sound translations of the HOL Light logic to ATP formalisms: untyped first-order, polymorphic typed first-order, and typed higher-order, (ii) export of the dependency information from HOL Light and ATP proofs for the machine learners, and (iii) choice of suitable representations and methods for learning from previous proofs, and their integration as advisors with HOL Light. This work is described and discussed here, and an initial analysis of the body of proofs that were found fully automatically is provided. Our goal is to combine the rich multistep inference of symbolic logical reasoning with the generalization capabilities of neural networks. We are particularly interested in complex reasoning about entities and relations in text and large-scale knowledge bases (KBs). (2015) use RNNs to compose the distributed semantics of multi-hop paths in KBs; however for multiple reasons, the approach lacks accuracy and practicality. This paper proposes three significant modeling advances: (1) we learn to jointly reason about relations, entities, and entity-types; (2) we use neural attention modeling to incorporate multiple paths; (3) we learn to share strength in a single RNN that represents logical composition across all relations. On a largescale Freebase+ClueWeb prediction task, we achieve 25 error reduction, and a 53 error reduction on sparse relations due to shared strength. On chains of reasoning in WordNet we reduce error in mean quantile by 84 versus previous state-of-the-art. The code and data are available at this https URL We applied two state-of-the-art machine learning techniques to the problem of selecting a good heuristic in a first-order theorem prover. Our aim was to demonstrate that sufficient information is available from simple feature measurements of a conjecture and axioms to determine a good choice of heuristic, and that the choice process can be automatically learned. Selecting from a set of 5 heuristics, the learned results are better than any single heuristic. The same results are also comparable to the prover's own heuristic selection method, which has access to 82 heuristics including the 5 used by our method, and which required additional human expertise to guide its design. One version of our system is able to decline proof attempts. This achieves a significant reduction in total time required, while at the same time causing only a moderate reduction in the number of theorems proved. To our knowledge no earlier system has had this capability. Large formal mathematical libraries consist of millions of atomic inference steps that give rise to a corresponding number of proved statements (lemmas). Analogously to the informal mathematical practice, only a tiny fraction of such statements is named and re-used in later proofs by formal mathematicians. In this work, we suggest and implement criteria defining the estimated usefulness of the HOL Light lemmas for proving further theorems. We use these criteria to mine the large inference graph of the lemmas in the HOL Light and Flyspeck libraries, adding up to millions of the best lemmas to the pool of statements that can be re-used in later proofs. We show that in combination with learning-based relevance filtering, such methods significantly strengthen automated theorem proving of new conjectures over large formal mathematical libraries such as Flyspeck. Learning-assisted automated reasoning has recently gained popularity among the users of Isabelle HOL, HOL Light, and Mizar. In this paper, we present an add-on to the HOL4 proof assistant and an adaptation of the HOL(y)Hammer system that provides machine learning-based premise selection and automated reasoning also for HOL4. We efficiently record the HOL4 dependencies and extract features from the theorem statements, which form a basis for premise selection. HOL(y)Hammer transforms the HOL4 statements in the various TPTP-ATP proof formats, which are then processed by the ATPs. We discuss the different evaluation settings: ATPs, accessible lemmas, and premise numbers. We measure the performance of HOL(y)Hammer on the HOL4 standard library. The results are combined accordingly and compared with the HOL Light experiments, showing a comparably high quality of predictions. The system directly benefits HOL4 users by automatically finding proofs dependencies that can be reconstructed by Metis. We describe the theory and implementation of a general theorem-proving technique for checking integrity of deductive databases recently proposed by Sadri and Kowalski. The method uses an extension of the SLDNF proof procedure and achieves the effect of the simplification algorithms of Nicolas, Lloyd, , and Decker by reasoning forwards from the update and thus focusing on the relevant parts of the database and the relevant constraints. We report improvements to HOODG, a supervised learning algorithm that induces concepts from labelled instances using oblivious, read-once decision graphs as the underlying hypothesis representation structure. While it is shown that the greedy approach to variable ordering is locally optimal, we also show an inherent limitation of all bottom-up induction algorithms, including HOODG, that construct such decision graphs bottom-up by minimizing the width of levels in the resulting graph. We report our empirical experiments that demonstrate the algorithm's generalization power. We present the first verification of full functional correctness for a range of linked data structure implementations, including mutable lists, trees, graphs, and hash tables. Specifically, we present the use of the Jahob verification system to verify formal specifications, written in classical higher-order logic, that completely capture the desired behavior of the Java data structure implementations (with the exception of properties involving execution time and or memory consumption). Given that the desired correctness properties include intractable constructs such as quantifiers, transitive closure, and lambda abstraction, it is a challenge to successfully prove the generated verification conditions. Our Jahob verification system uses integrated reasoning to split each verification condition into a conjunction of simpler subformulas, then apply a diverse collection of specialized decision procedures, first-order theorem provers, and, in the worst case, interactive theorem provers to prove each subformula. Techniques such as replacing complex subformulas with stronger but simpler alternatives, exploiting structure inherently present in the verification conditions, and, when necessary, inserting verified lemmas and proof hints into the imperative source code make it possible to seamlessly integrate all of the specialized decision procedures and theorem provers into a single powerful integrated reasoning system. By appropriately applying multiple proof techniques to discharge different subformulas, this reasoning system can effectively prove the complex and challenging verification conditions that arise in this context. In this work, we present a novel approach to ontology reasoning that is based on deep learning rather than logic-based formal reasoning. To this end, we introduce a new model for statistical relational learning that is built upon deep recursive neural networks, and give experimental evidence that it can easily compete with, or even outperform, existing logic-based reasoners on the task of ontology reasoning. More precisely, we compared our implemented system with one of the best logic-based ontology reasoners at present, RDFox, on a number of large standard benchmark datasets, and found that our system attained high reasoning quality, while being up to two orders of magnitude faster. Over the past few years, machine learning has been successfully combined with automated theorem provers to prove conjectures from proof assistants. However, such approaches do not usually focus on inductive proofs. In this work, we explore a combination of machine learning, a simple Boyer-Moore model and ATPs as a means of improving the automation of inductive proofs in the proof assistant HOL Light. We evaluate the framework using a number of inductive proof corpora. In each case, our approach achieves a higher success rate than running ATPs or the Boyer-Moore tool individually.