Abstract. Basically, the connection of two many-sorted theories is obtained by taking their disjoint union, and then connecting the two parts through connection functions that must behave like homomorphisms on the shared signature. We determine conditions under which decidability of the validity of universal formulae in the component theories transfers to their connection. In addition, we consider variants of the basic connection scheme. 1

Many approaches for Satisfiability Modulo Theory (SMT(T)) rely on the integration between a SAT solver and a decision procedure for sets of literals in the background theory T (T-solver). When T is the combination T1 ∪ T2 of two simpler theories, the approach is typically handled by means of Nelson-Oppen’s (NO) theory combination schema in which two specific T-solvers deduce and exchange (disjunctions of) interface equalities. In recent papers we have proposed a new approach to SMT(T1 ∪ T2), called Delayed Theory Combination (DTC). Here part or all the (possibly very expensive) task of deducing interface equalities is played by the SAT solver itself, at the potential cost of an enlargement of the boolean search space. In principle this enlargement could be up to exponential in the number of interface equalities generated. In this paper we show that this estimate was too pessimistic. We present a comparative analysis of DTC vs. NO for SMT(T1 ∪T2), which shows that, using stateof-the-art SAT-solving techniques, the amount of boolean branches performed by DTC can be upper bounded by the number of deductions and boolean branches performed by NO on the same problem. We prove the result for different deduction capabilities of the T-solvers and for both convex and non-convex theories.

Previous results for combining decision procedures for the word problem in the non-disjoint case do not apply to equational theories induced by modal logics---whose combination is not disjoint since they share the theory of Boolean algebras. Conversely, decidability results for the fusion of modal logics are strongly tailored towards the special theories at hand, and thus do not generalize to other equational theories.

One lesson learned from practical constraint solving applications is that constraints are often heterogeneous. Solving such constraints requires a collaboration of constraint solvers. In this paper, we introduce a methodology for the tight integration of CHR constraint programs into one such program. CHR is a high-level rule-based language for writing constraint solvers and reasoning systems. A constraint solver is well-behaved if it is terminating and conuent. When merging constraint solvers, this property may be lost. Based on previous results on CHR program analysis and transformation we show how to utilize completion to regain well-behavedness. We identify a class of solvers whose union is always confluent and we show that for preserving termination such a class is hard to find. The merged and completed constraint solvers may contain redundant rules. Utilizing the notion of operational equivalence, which is decidable for well-behaved CHR programs, we present a method to detect redundant rules in a CHR program.

If there exist ecient procedures (canonizers) for reducing terms of two rst-order theories to canonical form, can one use them to construct such a procedure for terms of the disjoint union of the two theories? We prove this is possible whenever the original theories are convex. As an application, we prove that algorithms for solving equations in the two theories (solvers) cannot be combined in a similar fashion. These results are relevant to the widely used Shostak's method for combining decision procedures for theories. They provide the rst rigorous answers to the questions about the possibility of directly combining canonizers and solvers.

Abstract. We introduce a quantifier-free set-theoretic language for combining sets with elements in the presence of the cardinality operator. We prove that the language is decidable by providing a combination method specifically tailored to the combination domain of sets, cardinal numbers, and elements. Our method uses as black boxes a decision procedure for the elements and a decision procedure for cardinal numbers. To be correct, our method requires that the theory of elements be stably infinite. However, we show that if we restrict set variables to range over finite sets only, then it is possible to modify our method so that it works even when the theory of the elements is not stably infinite. 1.

The Nelson-Oppen combination method combines ground satis ability checkers for rst-order theories satisfying certain conditions into a single ground satis ability checker for the union theory. The most signi cant restriction that the combined theories must satisfy, for the Nelson-Oppen combination method to be applicable, is that they must have disjoint signatures. Unfortunately, this is a very serious restriction since many combination problems concern theories over non-disjoint signatures.

Abstract. We explore the problem of automated reasoning about the nondisjoint combination of theories that share set variables and operations. We prove a combination theorem and apply it to show the decidability of the satisfiability problem for a class of formulas obtained by applying propositional operations to quantified formulas belonging to several expressive decidable logics. 1

Abstract. We present an overview of results on hierarchical and modular reasoning in complex theories. We show that for a special type of extensions of a base theory, which we call local, hierarchic reasoning is possible (i.e. proof tasks in the extension can be hierarchically reduced to proof tasks w.r.t. the base theory). Many theories important for computer science or mathematics fall into this class (typical examples are theories of data structures, theories of free or monotone functions, but also functions occurring in mathematical analysis). In fact, it is often necessary to consider complex extensions, in which various types of functions or data structures need to be taken into account at the same time. We show how such local theory extensions can be identified and under which conditions locality is preserved when combining theories, and we investigate possibilities of efficient modular reasoning in such theory combinations. We present several examples of application domains where local theories and local theory extensions occur in a natural way. We show, in particular, that various phenomena analyzed in the verification literature can be explained in a unified way using the notion of locality. 1

some of the material) and