How to use z3 BitVec or Int as an array index? - z3

I want to use a Int vector as an array index.
python.
array = [12,45,66,34]
s= Solver()
x = Int('x')
s.add(array[x] == 66)
so the x should be 2..
how can i do it?

Here's one way to do it:
from z3 import *
s = Solver ()
array = [12, 45, 66, 34]
A = Array ('A', IntSort(), IntSort())
i = 0
for elem in array:
A = Store(A, i, elem)
i = i + 1
x = Int ('x')
s.add(x >= 0)
s.add(x < len(array))
s.add(Select(A, x) == 66)
if s.check() == sat:
print s.model()
else:
print "Not found!"
This prints:
$ python a.py
[x = 2]

It is not possible to access integer array element with Z3 ArithRef variables. I suppose, the specified problem is looking for an element in an integer array (index) through Z3 solver.
Another possible way of doing it might be:
array = [12, 45, 66, 34]
x = Int('x')
s= Solver()
for i in range(len(array)):
s.add(Implies(array[i] == 66, x == i))
if s.check() == sat:
print(s.model())

Related

A Skolem model in Z3 should be unique, but is printing several (and repeated)

I am testing how similar are "assignment"-like models and "Skolem-function"-like models in Z3.
Thus, I proposed an experiment: I will create a formula for which the unique model is y=2; and try to "imitate" this formula so that the (unique) model is a Skolem function f(x)=2. I did this by using ExistsForall quantification for the y=2 case and ForallExists quantification for the f(x)=2 case.
Thus, I first performed the following (note that the y is existentially quantified from the top-level declaration):
from z3 import *
x,y = Ints('x y')
ct_0 = (x >= 2)
ct_1 = (y > 1)
ct_2 = (y <= x)
phi = ForAll([x], Implies(ct_0, And(ct_1,ct_2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi)
print(s.check())
print(s.model())
for i in range(0, 5):
if s.check() == sat:
m = s.model()[y]
print(m)
s.add(And(y != m))
This code successfully prints out y=2 as a unique model (no matter we asked for 5 more). Now, I tried the same for f(x)=2 (note that there is no y):
skolem = Function('skolem', IntSort(), IntSort())
x = Int('x')
ct0 = (x >= 2)
ct1 = (skolem(x) > 1)
ct2 = (skolem(x) <= x)
phi1 = ForAll([x], Implies(ct0, And(ct1,ct2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi1)
for i in range(0, 5):
if s.check() == sat:
m = s.model()
print(m)
s.add(skolem(x) != i)
This prints:
[skolem = [else -> 2]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, 1)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, -1)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, -1)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, -1)]]
My question is: why is the y=2 unique, whereas we get several Skolem functions? In Skolem functions, we get (and repeatedly) some functions in which the antecedent of phi1 (i.e., (x >= 2)) is negated (e.g., x=0); but in models, we do not get stuff like x=0 implies y=1, we only get y=2 because that is the unique model that does not depend on x. In the same way, [skolem = [else -> 2]] should be the unique "Skolem model" that does not depend on x.
There's a fundamental difference between these two queries. In the first one, you're looking for a single y that acts as the value that satisfies the property. And indeed y == 2 is the only choice.
But when you have a skolem function, you have an infinite number of witnesses. The very first one is:
skolem(x) = 2
i.e., the function that maps everything to 2. (You're internally equating this to the model y=2 in the first problem, but that's misleading.)
But there are other functions too. Here's the second one:
skolem(x) = if 2 <= x then 2 else 1
You can convince yourself this is perfectly fine, since it does give you the skolem function that provides a valid value for y (i.e., 2), when the consequent matters. What it returns in the else case is immaterial. (i.e., when x < 2). And similarly, you can simply do different things when x < 2, giving you an infinite number of skolem functions that work. (Of course, the difference is not interesting, but different nonetheless.)
What you really are trying to say, I guess, is there's nothing "else" that's interesting. Unfortunately that's harder to automate, since it's hard to get a Python function back from a z3 model. But you can do it manually:
from z3 import *
skolem = Function('skolem', IntSort(), IntSort())
x = Int('x')
ct0 = (x >= 2)
ct1 = (skolem(x) > 1)
ct2 = (skolem(x) <= x)
phi1 = ForAll([x], Implies(ct0, And(ct1,ct2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi1)
print(s.check())
print(s.model())
# The above gives you the model [else -> 2], i.e., the function that maps everything to 2.
# Let's add a constraint that says we want something "different" in the interesting case of "x >= 2":
s.add(ForAll([x], Implies(x >= 2, skolem(x) != 2)))
print(s.check())
This prints:
sat
[skolem = [else -> 2]]
unsat
which attests to the uniqueness of the skolem-function in the "interesting" case.

How to output more than one Skolem functions in Z3(Py)

I am playing with Skolem functions in Z3-Py. In the following lines, I describe the Skolem function that satisfies the formula Forall x. Exists y. (x>=2) --> (y>1) /\ (y<=x) interpreted over integers:
x = Int('x')
skolem = Function('skolem', IntSort(), IntSort())
ct_0 = (x >= 2)
ct_1 = (skolem(x) > 1)
ct_2 = (skolem(x) <= x)
phi = ForAll([x], Implies(ct_0, And(ct_1,ct_2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi)
print(s.check())
print(s.model())
Which I understand that it outputs the unique 'model' possible: y=2 (i.e., f(x)=2). It is printed as follows:
sat
[skolem = [else -> 2]]
I have a preliminary question: why does the function use an else? I guess it comes from the fact that "it is only activated" if the antecedent (x>=2) holds. But which is the co-domain of the function if it is not the else branch (output 2) the one activated, but the if branch?
But now it comes my actual question. I solved the same formula, but interpreted over reals:
x = Real('x')
skolem = Function('skolem', RealSort(), RealSort())
ct_0 = (x >= 2.0)
ct_1 = (skolem(x) > 1.0)
ct_2 = (skolem(x) <= x)
phi = ForAll([x], Implies(ct_0, And(ct_1,ct_2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi)
print(s.check())
print(s.model())
And this outputs... the same Skolem function! Is this right?
In case it is, it is still curious, since it could have chosen many others; e.g., y=1.5. Then, I would like to ask for another Skolem function to Z3, so I proceed as if I was asking for 5 new models:
phi = ForAll([x], Implies(ct_0, And(ct_1,ct_2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi)
for i in range(0,5):
if s.check() == sat:
m = s.model()
print(m)
s.add(Not(m))
But I get the following error: Z3Exception: True, False or Z3 Boolean expression expected. Received [skolem = [else -> 2]] of type <class 'z3.z3.ModelRef'>. I mean, I see Z3 expects Boolean for the negation (which is obvious hehe), so how can I encode the fact that "I add the negation of this Skolem function into the formula", i.e., that I want to find another Skolem function?
In your loop, you're trying to add the negation of your model m; but that's not what Not(m) means. In fact, Not(m) is meaningless: Not operates on booleans, not models; which is the bizarre error you're getting.
To do what you're trying to achieve; simply assert that you want a different skolem function:
from z3 import *
x = Real('x')
skolem = Function('skolem', RealSort(), RealSort())
ct_0 = (x >= 2)
ct_1 = (skolem(x) > 1)
ct_2 = (skolem(x) <= 2)
phi = ForAll([x], Implies(ct_0, And(ct_1,ct_2)))
s = Solver()
s.add(phi)
for i in range(0, 5):
if s.check() == sat:
m = s.model()
print(m)
s.add(skolem(x) != i)
This prints:
[skolem = [else -> 2]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, 1/2)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 2, 1/2)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 3/2, 1/2)]]
[x = 0, skolem = [else -> If(2 <= Var(0), 3/2, 1/2)]]
Now this is a little hard to read, but I think you can figure it out. A function model is simply a finite-mapping with an else clause, which is what a finite function is. The Var call refers to its argument. I haven't looked at the definitions z3 provides in detail to make sure they're good, but I have no reason to suspect why not. See if you can work this out for yourself; it's a valuable exercise! Feel free to ask further questions if anything isn't clear.

Why is Z3 giving me unsat for the following formula?

I have the following formula and Python code trying to find the largest n satisfying some property P:
x, u, n, n2 = Ints('x u n n2')
def P(u):
return Implies(And(2 <= x, x <= u), And(x >= 1, x <= 10))
nIsLargest = ForAll(n2, Implies(P(n2), n2 <= n))
exp = ForAll(x, And(P(n), nIsLargest))
s = SolverFor("LIA")
s.reset()
s.add(exp)
print(s.check())
if s.check() == sat:
print(s.model())
My expectation was that it would return n=10, yet Z3 returns unsat. What am I missing?
You're using the optimization API incorrectly; and your question is a bit confusing since your predicate P has a free variable x: Obviously, the value that maximizes it will depend on both x and u.
Here's a simpler example that can get you started, showing how to use the API correctly:
from z3 import *
def P(x):
return And(x >= 1, x <= 10)
n = Int('n')
opt = Optimize()
opt.add(P(n))
maxN = opt.maximize(n)
r = opt.check()
print(r)
if r == sat:
print("maxN =", maxN.value())
This prints:
sat
maxN = 10
Hopefully you can take this example and extend it your use case.

Best array manipulation API

The SMT-LIB 2.0 array initialization and manipulation is a bit cumbersome. As the following code explains, http://rise4fun.com/Z3/kxmrd.
Is there any elegant way to initialise or manipulate arrays, using Python/C/C++/.Net API than SMT-LIB 2.0 ?
You could use regular Python constructs such as for i in range(n) to achieve what you want:
s = Solver()
a = Array('a', IntSort(), IntSort())
xs = [20, 23, 27, 12, 19, 31, 41, 7]
for i in range(len(xs)):
s.add(Select(a, i) == xs[i])
a1 = Array('a1', IntSort(), IntSort())
s.add(a1 == Store(a, 3,9 ))
print s.check()
m = s.model()
for d in m.decls():
print "%s = %s" % (d.name(), m[d])
Run it online here.
It would be nice if you could write something like s.add(a == xs) or s.add(a.startsWith(xs)), but I don't know if that is possible.

Needless Var() returned by Solver.model()

Solver.model() sometimes returns an assignment with a seemingly-needless Var(), whereas I was (perhaps naively) expecting Solver.model() to always return a concrete value for each variable. For example:
#!/usr/bin/python
import z3
x, y = z3.Ints('x y')
a = z3.Array('a', z3.IntSort(), z3.IntSort())
e = z3.Not(z3.Exists([x], z3.And(x != y, a[x] == a[y])))
solver = z3.Solver()
solver.add(e)
print solver.check()
print solver.model()
produces
sat
[k!1 = 0,
a = [else -> k!5!7(k!6(Var(0)))],
y = 1,
k!5 = [else -> k!5!7(k!6(Var(0)))],
k!5!7 = [1 -> 3, else -> 2],
k!6 = [1 -> 1, else -> 0]]
What's going on here? Is Var(0) in a's "else" referring to the 0th argument to the a array, meaning a[i] = k!5!7[k!6[i]]? Is it possible to get a concrete satisfying assignment for a out of Z3, such as a = [1 -> 1, else -> 0]?
This is the intended output. The interpretation for functions and arrays should be viewed as function definitions. Keep in mind that the assertion
z3.Not(z3.Exists([x], z3.And(x != y, a[x] == a[y])))
is essentially a universal quantifier. For quantifier free problems, Z3 does generate the "concrete assignments" suggested in your post. However, this kind of representation is not expressive enough. In the end of the message, I attached an example that cannot be encoded using "concrete assignments".
The following post has additional information about how models are encoded in Z3.
understanding the z3 model
You can find more details regarding the encoding used by Z3 at http://rise4fun.com/Z3/tutorial/guide
Here is an example that produces a model that can't be encoded using "concrete" assignments (available online at http://rise4fun.com/Z3Py/eggh):
a = Array('a', IntSort(), IntSort())
i, j = Ints('i j')
solver = Solver()
x, y = Ints('x y')
solver.add(ForAll([x, y], Implies(x <= y, a[x] <= a[y])))
solver.add(a[i] != a[j])
print solver.check()
print solver.model()

Resources