dcao / babble

library learning w egraphs

Babble

Looking for the POPL 23 artifact? Head to the POPL23.md file on the popl23 branch.

Experimental library learning using anti-unification of e-graphs.

Building

$ git clone https://github.com/dcao/babble.git
$ cd babble
$ make

Examples

Learning filter:

$ cargo run --release --bin=list -- examples/filter-list.bab

Learning nested functions:

$ cargo run --release --bin=smiley -- examples/nested-functions.bab

How it works

As a simple example, consider the following list program (with size 29):

(list
 (cons 0 (cons 0 (cons 0 empty)))
 (cons 1 (cons 1 (cons 1 empty)))
 (cons 2 (cons 2 (cons 2 empty)))
 (cons 3 (cons 3 (cons 3 empty))))

Here babble learns the following compressed program (with size 23):

(lib f8 (λ (cons $0 (cons $0 (cons $0 empty)))) 
  (list (@ f8 0) (@ f8 1) (@ f8 2) (@ f8 3)))

To this end, it first it adds the initial expression to an e-graph, and then goes through the following steps.

Step 1: Anti-unification

Babble anti-unifies (AU) each pair of e-nodes in the e-graph in a bottom-up fashion to avoid recomputing AU for subterms (this is actually based on DFTA instersection). For example:

AU empty                            empty                            = empty
AU 0                                1                                = ?x01            -- indexed by the e-classes of 0 and 1
AU (cons 0 empty)                   (cons 1 empty)                   = cons ?x01 empty -- reuses AU results for subterms
...
AU (cons 0 (cons 0 (cons 0 empty))) (cons 1 (cons 1 (cons 1 empty))) = (cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 empty)))

Step 2: Generate abstraction rewrites

Now for each anti-unification result that is not just a variable or constant term, babble generates a rewrite rule that would turn matching terms into an application of a newly-defined library function.

For example, the AU result (cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 empty))) gives rise to the rewrite rule:

(cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 (cons ?x01 empty)))  =>  (fun f (lambda (cons $0 (cons $0 (cons $0 empty)))) (f ?x01))

(the name f will be fresh for each rule). This rule, when applied, will result in rewriting each one of the three-element lists in the original term into a definition of a new library function followed by its application to the appropriate argument (i.e. 0, 1, 2).

Step 3: Merging function definitions

In the next step, we give egg all the generated abstraction rewrites together with some fixed rules that propagate fun definitions up the term and merge different funs with the same definition when they are propagated from two sides of a cons, list, or some other constructor.

For example, this rule propagates fun on top of cons:

(cons (fun ?name ?def ?body) ?expr)   =>   (fun ?name ?def (cons ?body ?expr))      if ?name not free in ?expr

And this one merges two funs with the same definition from two sides of cons:

(cons (fun ?name ?def ?body1) (fun ?name ?def ?body2)) => (fun ?name ?def (cons ?body1 ?body2))