Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.39009

Improved Tristate Multiplication With Formalization in Rocq

Nandakumar Edamana·Piyush P Kurur·Unnikrishnan Cheramangalath
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We give a new multiplication algorithm for tristate numbers improving upon the state-of-the-art implementation from the Linux kernel in terms of precision and formal proofs. Our algorithm is significantly more precise as shown by experimental evaluation (at the peak, giving better results in 95.59% cases compared to the previous work for 31-bit samples). Importantly, we achieve this additional precision with performance comparable to the previous algorithm, as demonstrated by benchmarks. Finally, we formalize and prove the soundness of the algorithm in the Rocq proof assistant, adding to the trust in the resulting implementation. Our algorithm is now part of the upstream Linux kernel. Our soundness proof in Rocq for the new multiplication algorithm works for all bit widths, while the SAT/SMT-based machine-checked proof accompanying the previous algorithm was restricted to 8 bits. We also provide Rocq proofs for the soundness and optimality of the newly added tnum union operation and the existing tnum addition algorithm from the Linux kernel. Our optimality proof for tnum addition presents a simpler and straightforward lemma compared to prior work.

Explore related subjects

cs.LO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Nandakumar Edamana, Piyush P Kurur, Unnikrishnan Cheramangalath. 2026-09-30. Improved Tristate Multiplication With Formalization in Rocq. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.39009

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Unification Type of an Equational Theory May Depend on the Instantiation Preorder: From Results for Single Theories to Results for Classes of Theories

The unification type of an equational theory is defined using a preorder on substitutions, called the instantiation preorder, whose scope is either restricted to the variables occurring in the unification problem, or unrestricted such that all variables are considered. It has been known for more than three decades that the unification type of an equational theory may vary, depending on which instantiation preorder is used. More precisely, it was shown in 1991 that the theory ACUI of an associative, commutative, and idempotent binary function symbol with a unit is unitary w.r.t. the restricted instantiation preorder, but not unitary w.r.t. the unrestricted one. In 2016 this result was strengthened by showing that the unrestricted type of this theory also cannot be finitary. In the conference version of this article, we considerably improved on this result by proving that ACUI is infinitary w.r.t. the unrestricted instantiation preorder, thus precluding type zero. We also showed that, w.r.t. this preorder, the unification type of ACU (where idempotency is removed from the axioms) and of AC (where additionally the unit is removed) is infinitary, though it is respectively unitary and finitary in the restricted case. In the other direction, we proved (using the example of unification in the description logic EL) that the unification type may actually improve from type zero to infinitary when switching from the restricted instantiation preorder to the unrestricted one. In the present article, we not only determine the unrestricted unification type of considerably more equational theories, but we also prove general results for whole classes of theories. In particular, we show that theories that are regular and finite, regular and locally finite, or regular, monoidal, and satisfy an additional condition are Noetherian, and thus cannot have unrestricted unification type zero.

cs.LO↗
arXiv2026

New Proofs of Weak Normalization for Propositional Logic

We present new proofs of weak normalization for intuitionistic and classical propositional logics (with the full set of operators -- falsum, implication, conjunction and disjunction). These proofs work with cuts rather than cut segments, and they provide explicit ``local'' rules for determining whether to contract a whole proof or reduce one of its subproofs, and in the latter case, which subproof to reduce. Interestingly, much of the complication in the case of intuitionistic logic is due to the disjunction elimination rule, while our version of the same rule for classical logic has falsum as conclusion always, and so is much easier to handle. All the complication in the case of classical logic shifts to cuts involving the reductio ad absurdum rule. We also discuss a formalization of the entire proof in Lean, and present a deterministic algorithm for weak normalization.

cs.LO↗