Today, lets look at a classic use-case for refinement types, namely, the static verification of **vector access bounds**. Along the way, we’ll see some examples that illustrate how LiquidHaskell reasons about *recursion*, *higher-order functions*, *data types*, and *polymorphism*.

22: module VectorBounds ( 23: safeLookup 24: , unsafeLookup, unsafeLookup' 25: , absoluteSum, absoluteSum' 26: , dotProduct 27: , sparseProduct, sparseProduct' 28: ) where 29: 30: import Prelude hiding (length) 31: import Data.List (foldl') 32: import Data.Vector hiding (foldl')

## Specifying Bounds for Vectors

One classical use-case for refinement types is to verify the safety of accesses of arrays and vectors and such, by proving that the indices used in such accesses are *within* the vector bounds. Lets see how to do this with LiquidHaskell by writing a few short functions that manipulate vectors, in particular, those from the popular vector library.

First things first. Lets **specify** bounds safety by *refining* the types for the key functions exported by the module `Data.Vector`

.

`Data.Vector`

50: module spec Data.Vector where 51: 52: import GHC.Base 53: 54: measure vlen :: (Vector a) -> Int 55: assume length :: x:(Vector a) -> {v:Int | v = (vlen x)} 56: assume ! :: x:(Vector a) -> {v:Int | 0 <= v && v < (vlen x)} -> a

In particular, we

**define**a*property*called`vlen`

which denotes the size of the vector,**assume**that the`length`

function*returns*an integer equal to the vector’s size, and**assume**that the lookup function`!`

*requires*an index between`0`

and the vector’s size.

There are several things worth paying close attention to in the above snippet.

**Measures**

Recall that measures define auxiliary (or so-called **ghost**) properties of data values that are useful for specification and verification, but which *don’t actually exist at run-time*. Thus, they will *only appear in specifications*, i.e. inside type refinements, but *never* inside code. Often we will use helper functions like `length`

in this case, which *pull* or *materialize* the ghost values from the refinement world into the actual code world.

**Assumes**

We write `assume`

because in this scenario we are not *verifying* the implementation of `Data.Vector`

, we are simply *using* the properties of the library to verify client code. If we wanted to verify the library itself, we would ascribe the above types to the relevant functions in the Haskell source for `Data.Vector`

.

**Dependent Refinements**

Notice that in the function type (e.g. for `length`

) we have *named* the *input* parameter `x`

so that we can refer to it in the *output* refinement.

91: assume length :: x:(Vector a) -> {v : Int | v = (vlen x)}

states that the `Int`

output is exactly equal to the size of the input `Vector`

named `x`

.

In other words, the output refinement **depends on** the input value, which crucially allows us to write properties that *relate* different program values.

**Verifying a Simple Wrapper**

Lets try write some simple functions to sanity check the above specifications. First, consider an *unsafe* vector lookup function:

105: vec:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([vec])),(0 <= VV)} -> aunsafeLookup (Data.Vector.Vector a)vec {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([vec])),(0 <= VV)}index = {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = vec),(vlen([VV]) >= 0)}vec x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> a! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = index),(VV < vlen([vec])),(0 <= VV)}index

If we run this through LiquidHaskell, it will spit back a type error for the expression `x ! i`

because (happily!) it cannot prove that `index`

is between `0`

and the `vlen vec`

. Of course, we can specify the bounds requirement in the input type

114: {-@ unsafeLookup :: vec:Vector a 115: -> {v: Int | (0 <= v && v < (vlen vec))} 116: -> a 117: @-}

then LiquidHaskell is happy to verify the lookup. Of course, now the burden of ensuring the index is valid is pushed to clients of `unsafeLookup`

.

Instead, we might write a *safe* lookup function that performs the *bounds check* before looking up the vector:

127: {-@ safeLookup :: Vector a -> Int -> Maybe a @-} 128: (Data.Vector.Vector a) -> (GHC.Types.Int) -> (Data.Maybe.Maybe a)safeLookup (Data.Vector.Vector a)x (GHC.Types.Int)i 129: | {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x <= y))}<= {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i)}i x:(GHC.Types.Bool) -> y:(GHC.Types.Bool) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> && [(? Prop([x])); (? Prop([y]))])}&& {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i)}i x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x < y))}< x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([x])),(VV >= 0)}length {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = x),(vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x = x:a -> {VV : (Data.Maybe.Maybe a) | ((? isJust([VV])) <=> true), (fromJust([VV]) = x)}Just ({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = x),(vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> a! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i)}i) 130: | otherwise = {VV : (Data.Maybe.Maybe {VV : a | false}) | ((? isJust([VV])) <=> false)}Nothing

**Predicate Aliases**

The type for `unsafeLookup`

above is rather verbose as we have to spell out the upper and lower bounds and conjoin them. Just as we enjoy abstractions when programming, we will find it handy to have abstractions in the specification mechanism. To this end, LiquidHaskell supports *predicate aliases*, which are best illustrated by example

142: {-@ predicate Btwn Lo I Hi = (Lo <= I && I < Hi) @-} 143: {-@ predicate InBounds I A = (Btwn 0 I (vlen A)) @-}

Now, we can simplify the type for the unsafe lookup function to

149: {-@ unsafeLookup' :: x:Vector a -> {v:Int | (InBounds v x)} -> a @-} 150: unsafeLookup' :: Vector a -> Int -> a 151: x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> aunsafeLookup' (Data.Vector.Vector a)x {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)}i = {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = x),(vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> a! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i),(VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)}i

## Our First Recursive Function

OK, with the tedious preliminaries out of the way, lets write some code!

To start: a vanilla recursive function that adds up the absolute values of the elements of an integer vector.

164: absoluteSum :: Vector Int -> Int 165: (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (0 <= VV)}absoluteSum (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int))vec = x:(GHC.Prim.Int#) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x : int))}if {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 x:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))} -> y:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x < y))}< {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = n),(VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n then x6:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV)} -> x4:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV = x6), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= x6), (VV >= x4), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV), (x4 <= VV)}go {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 else x:(GHC.Prim.Int#) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x : int))}0 166: where 167: x6:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV)} -> x4:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV = x6), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= x6), (VV >= x4), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV), (x4 <= VV)}go {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0),(0 <= VV)}acc {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))}i 168: | {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))}i x:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= i), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec])), (i <= VV)} -> y:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= i), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec])), (i <= VV)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x != y))}/= {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = n),(VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n = x6:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV)} -> x4:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = 0), (VV = x6), (VV < n), (VV < vlen([vec])), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= x6), (VV >= x4), (0 <= VV), (x6 <= VV), (x4 <= VV)}go ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = acc),(VV >= 0),(0 <= VV)}acc x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x + y))}+ n:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0),(VV >= n)}abz ({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (VV = vec), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}vec x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int)! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))}i)) ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= n), (VV <= vlen([vec]))}i x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x + y))}+ {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (1 : int))}1) 169: | otherwise = {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = acc),(VV >= 0),(0 <= VV)}acc 170: {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n = x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([x])),(VV >= 0)}length {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (VV = vec), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}vec

where the function `abz`

is the absolute value function from before.

176: (GHC.Num.Num a) -> (GHC.Classes.Ord a) -> n:a -> {VV : a | (VV >= 0),(VV >= n)}abz an = {VV : (GHC.Integer.Type.Integer) | (VV = 0)}if a0 x:a -> y:a -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x <= y))}<= {VV : a | (VV = n)}n then {VV : a | (VV = n)}n else (a0 x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (VV = (x - y))}- {VV : a | (VV = n)}n)

## Digression: Introducing Errors

If you are following along in the demo page – I heartily recommend that you try the following modifications, one at a time, and see what happens.

**What happens if:**

You

*remove*the check`0 < n`

(see`absoluteSumNT`

in the demo code)You

*replace*the guard with`i <= n`

In the *former* case, LiquidHaskell will *verify* safety, but in the *latter* case, it will grumble that your program is *unsafe*.

Do you understand why? (Thanks to smog_alado for pointing this out :))

## Refinement Type Inference

LiquidHaskell happily verifies `absoluteSum`

– or, to be precise, the safety of the vector accesses `vec ! i`

. The verification works out because LiquidHaskell is able to automatically infer a suitable type for `go`

. Shuffle your mouse over the identifier above to see the inferred type. Observe that the type states that the first parameter `acc`

(and the output) is `0 <= V`

. That is, the returned value is non-negative.

More importantly, the type states that the second parameter `i`

is `0 <= V`

and `V <= n`

and `V <= (vlen vec)`

. That is, the parameter `i`

is between `0`

and the vector length (inclusive). LiquidHaskell uses these and the test that `i /= n`

to establish that `i`

is in fact between `0`

and `(vlen vec)`

thereby verifing safety.

In fact, if we want to use the function externally (i.e. in another module) we can go ahead and strengthen its type to specify that the output is non-negative.

221: {-@ absoluteSum :: Vector Int -> {v: Int | 0 <= v} @-}

**What happens if:** You *replace* the output type for `absoluteSum`

with `{v: Int | 0 < v }`

?

## Bottling Recursion With a Higher-Order `loop`

Next, lets refactor the above low-level recursive function into a generic higher-order `loop`

.

233: loop :: Int -> Int -> a -> (Int -> a -> a) -> a 234: lo:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (0 <= VV)} -> hi:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (lo <= VV)} -> a -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < hi),(lo <= VV)} -> a -> a) -> aloop {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (0 <= VV)}lo {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (lo <= VV)}hi abase {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < hi),(lo <= VV)} -> a -> af = {VV : a | (VV = base)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = lo), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV)} -> ago {VV : a | (VV = base)}base {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = lo),(0 <= VV)}lo 235: where 236: {VV : a | (VV = base)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = lo), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV)} -> ago aacc {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)}i 237: | {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)}i x:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= i), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (i <= VV), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)} -> y:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= i), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (i <= VV), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x != y))}/= {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = hi), (VV = hi), (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (hi <= VV), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)}hi = {VV : a | (VV = base)} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = lo), (VV >= 0), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV)} -> ago ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (VV < hi), (VV < hi), (0 <= VV), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)} -> a -> af {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)}i {VV : a | (VV = acc)}acc) ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV >= lo), (VV >= lo), (0 <= VV), (VV <= hi), (VV <= hi), (lo <= VV), (lo <= VV)}i x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x + y))}+ {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (1 : int))}1) 238: | otherwise = {VV : a | (VV = acc)}acc

**Using loop to compute absoluteSum**

We can now use `loop`

to implement `absoluteSum`

like so:

246: (GHC.Num.Num a) -> {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) | false} -> {VV : a | false}absoluteSum' {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) | false}vec = {VV : (GHC.Integer.Type.Integer) | (VV = 0)}if {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 x:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false} -> y:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false} -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Bool) | ((? Prop([VV])) <=> (x < y))}< {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = n),(VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n then lo:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (0 <= VV)} -> hi:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (lo <= VV)} -> {VV : a | false} -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < hi),(lo <= VV)} -> {VV : a | false} -> {VV : a | false}) -> {VV : a | false}loop {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = n),(VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n a0 {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false} -> {VV : a | false} -> {VV : a | false}body else {VV : (GHC.Integer.Type.Integer) | (VV = 0)}0 247: where {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false} -> {VV : a | false} -> {VV : a | false}body = \{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false}i {VV : a | false}acc -> {VV : a | false}acc x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (VV = (x + y))}+ ({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) | false}vec x:(Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> {VV : a | false}! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | false}i) 248: {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([vec])),(VV >= 0)}n = x:(Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([x])),(VV >= 0)}length {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector {VV : a | false}) | false}vec

LiquidHaskell verifies `absoluteSum'`

without any trouble.

It is very instructive to see the type that LiquidHaskell *infers* for `loop`

– it looks something like

257: {-@ loop :: lo: {v: Int | (0 <= v) } 258: -> hi: {v: Int | (lo <= v) } 259: -> a 260: -> (i: {v: Int | (Btwn lo v hi)} -> a -> a) 261: -> a 262: @-}

In english, the above type states that

`lo`

the loop*lower*bound is a non-negative integer`hi`

the loop*upper*bound is a greater than`lo`

,`f`

the loop*body*is only called with integers between`lo`

and`hi`

.

Inference is a rather convenient option – it can be tedious to have to keep typing things like the above! Of course, if we wanted to make `loop`

a public or exported function, we could use the inferred type to generate an explicit signature too.

277: loop 0 n 0 body

the parameters `lo`

and `hi`

are instantiated with `0`

and `n`

respectively (which, by the way is where the inference engine deduces non-negativity from) and thus LiquidHaskell concludes that `body`

is only called with values of `i`

that are *between* `0`

and `(vlen vec)`

, which shows the safety of the call `vec ! i`

.

**Using loop to compute dotProduct**

Here’s another use of `loop`

– this time to compute the `dotProduct`

of two vectors.

292: dotProduct :: Vector Int -> Vector Int -> Int 293: x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (vlen([VV]) = vlen([x]))} -> (GHC.Types.Int)dotProduct (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int))x {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (vlen([VV]) = vlen([x]))}y = lo:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (0 <= VV)} -> hi:{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (lo <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int) -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < hi),(lo <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int) -> (GHC.Types.Int)) -> (GHC.Types.Int)loop {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 (x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = vlen([x])),(VV >= 0)}length {VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (VV = x), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x) {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (0 : int))}0 ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([y])), (0 <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int) -> (GHC.Types.Int)\{VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([y])), (0 <= VV)}i -> (x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = (x + y))}+ ({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (VV = x), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int)! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([y])), (0 <= VV)}i) x:(GHC.Types.Int) -> y:(GHC.Types.Int) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (&& [(x >= 0); (y >= 0)] => (VV >= 0))}* ({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) | (VV = y), (vlen([VV]) = vlen([x])), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}y x:(Data.Vector.Vector (GHC.Types.Int)) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> (GHC.Types.Int)! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([y])), (0 <= VV)}i)))

The gimlet-eyed reader will realize that the above is quite unsafe – what if `x`

is a 10-dimensional vector while `y`

has only 3-dimensions?

300: *** Exception: ./Data/Vector/Generic.hs:244 ((!)): index out of bounds ...

*Yech*.

This is precisely the sort of unwelcome surprise we want to do away with at compile-time. Refinements to the rescue! We can specify that the vectors have the same dimensions quite easily

310: {-@ dotProduct :: x:(Vector Int) 311: -> y:{v: (Vector Int) | (vlen v) = (vlen x)} 312: -> Int 313: @-}

after which LiquidHaskell will gladly verify that the implementation of `dotProduct`

is indeed safe!

## Refining Data Types

Next, suppose we want to write a *sparse dot product*, that is, the dot product of a vector and a **sparse vector** represented by a list of index-value tuples.

**Representing Sparse Vectors**

We can represent the sparse vector with a **refinement type alias**

331: {-@ type SparseVector a N = [({v: Int | (Btwn 0 v N)}, a)] @-}

As with usual types, the alias `SparseVector`

on the left is just a shorthand for the (longer) type on the right, it does not actually define a new type. Thus, the above alias is simply a refinement of Haskell’s `[(Int, a)]`

type, with a size parameter `N`

that facilitates easy specification reuse. In this way, refinements let us express invariants of containers like lists in a straightforward manner.

**Aside:** If you are familiar with the *index-style* length encoding e.g. as found in DML or Agda, then note that despite appearances, our `SparseVector`

definition is *not* indexed. Instead, we deliberately choose to encode properties with logical refinement predicates, to facilitate SMT based checking and inference.

**Verifying Uses of Sparse Vectors**

Next, we can write a recursive procedure that computes the sparse product

353: {-@ sparseProduct :: (Num a) => x:(Vector a) 354: -> SparseVector a (vlen x) 355: -> a 356: @-} 357: (GHC.Num.Num a) -> x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} , a)] -> asparseProduct (Data.Vector.Vector a)x [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} , a)]y = {VV : a | (VV = 0)} -> {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y), (len([VV]) = len([y])), (len([VV]) >= 0)} -> ago a0 {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y),(len([VV]) >= 0)}y 358: where 359: {VV : a | (VV = 0)} -> {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y), (len([VV]) = len([y])), (len([VV]) >= 0)} -> ago asum ((i, v) : y') = {VV : a | (VV = 0)} -> {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y), (len([VV]) = len([y])), (len([VV]) >= 0)} -> ago ({VV : a | (VV = sum)}sum x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (VV = (x + y))}+ a({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = x), (VV = x), (vlen([VV]) = vlen([x])), (vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> a! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)}i) x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (&& [(x >= 0); (y >= 0)] => (VV >= 0))}* {VV : a | (VV = v)}v) {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y'),(len([VV]) >= 0)}y' 360: go sum [] = {VV : a | (VV = sum)}sum

LiquidHaskell verifies the above by using the specification for `y`

to conclude that for each tuple `(i, v)`

in the list, the value of `i`

is within the bounds of the vector `x`

, thereby proving the safety of the access `x ! i`

.

## Refinements and Polymorphism

The sharp reader will have undoubtedly noticed that the sparse product can be more cleanly expressed as a fold.

Indeed! Let us recall the type of the`foldl`

operation
375: foldl' :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> [b] -> a

Thus, we can simply fold over the sparse vector, accumulating the `sum`

as we go along

382: {-@ sparseProduct' :: (Num a) => x:(Vector a) 383: -> SparseVector a (vlen x) 384: -> a 385: @-} 386: (GHC.Num.Num a) -> x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} , a)] -> asparseProduct' (Data.Vector.Vector a)x [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} , a)]y = (a -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a) -> a) -> a -> [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] -> afoldl' a -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a) -> abody a0 {VV : [({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a)] | (VV = y),(len([VV]) >= 0)}y 387: where 388: a -> ({VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)} , a) -> abody asum (i, v) = {VV : a | (VV = sum)}sum x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (VV = (x + y))}+ a({VV : (Data.Vector.Vector a) | (VV = x),(vlen([VV]) >= 0)}x x:(Data.Vector.Vector a) -> {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV < vlen([x])),(0 <= VV)} -> a! {VV : (GHC.Types.Int) | (VV = i), (VV >= 0), (VV < vlen([x])), (0 <= VV)}i) x:a -> y:a -> {VV : a | (&& [(x >= 0); (y >= 0)] => (VV >= 0))}* {VV : a | (VV = v)}v

LiquidHaskell digests this too, without much difficulty.

The main trick is in how the polymorphism of `foldl'`

is instantiated.

The GHC type inference engine deduces that at this site, the type variable

`b`

from the signature of`foldl'`

is instantiated to the Haskell type`(Int, a)`

.Correspondingly, LiquidHaskell infers that in fact

`b`

can be instantiated to the*refined*type`({v: Int | (Btwn 0 v (vlen x))}, a)`

.

Walk the mouse over to `i`

to see this inferred type. (You can also hover over `foldl'`

above to see the rather more verbose fully instantiated type.)

Thus, the inference mechanism saves us a fair bit of typing and allows us to reuse existing polymorphic functions over containers and such without ceremony.

## Conclusion

That’s all for now folks! Hopefully the above gives you a reasonable idea of how one can use refinements to verify size related properties, and more generally, to specify and verify properties of recursive, and polymorphic functions operating over datatypes. Next time, we’ll look at how we can teach LiquidHaskell to think about properties of recursive structures like lists and trees.