Abstract
The CASC competitions among automated theorem provers show that there is no single system that outperforms all other systems in all domains. One reaction to this observation is the combination of several systems in a competitive (e.g., the SSCPA system) or cooperative manner (e.g., the CSSCPA and TECHS systems). Thereby, general-purpose heuristics select promising systems to be executed and promising intermediate results to be exchanged. Typically, exchanged results are restricted to clauses or equations that are accepted by all systems. The use of particular domain-specific services for particular subtasks such as the construction of mathematical objects and their flexible cooperation with other services guided by mathematically motivated control knowledge is not possible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bundy, A.: The Use of Explicit Plans to Guide Inductive Proofs. In: Proc. of CADE–9, pp. 111–120 (1988)
Cohen, A., Murray, S., Pollet, M., Sorge, V.: Certifying solutions to permutation group problems. In: Baader, F. (ed.) CADE 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2741, pp. 258–273. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Colton, S.: The keY system 1.0 (Deduction component). In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4603, pp. 379–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Dixon, L., Fleuriot, J.D.: IsaPlanner: A prototype proof planner in isabelle. In: Baader, F. (ed.) CADE 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2741, pp. 279–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Engelmore, R., Morgan, T.: Blackboard Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1988)
The OMEGA Group: Proof Development with OMEGA. In: Proc. of CADE–18, pp. 144–149 (2002)
Meier, A., Melis, E.: Failure reasoning in multiple-strategy proof planning. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (2005) (to appear )
Meier, A., Pollet, M., Sorge, V.: Comparing Approaches to Explore the Domain of Residue Classes. Journal of Symbolic Computation 34(4), 287–306 (2002)
Meier, A., Sorge, V., Colton, S.: Employing Theory Formation to Guide Proof Planning. In: Proc. of Joint AISC and Calculemus 2002, pp. 275–289 (2002)
Melis, E., Meier, A.: Proof planning with multiple strategies. In: Palamidessi, C., Moniz Pereira, L., Lloyd, J.W., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.-K., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P.J. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1861, pp. 644–659. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Melis, E., Siekmann, J.: Knowledge-Based Proof Planning. Artificial Intelligence 115(1), 65–105 (1999)
Richardson, J.D.C., Smaill, A., Green, I.M.: System description: Proof planning in higher-order logic with λ {\it clam}. In: Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H. (eds.) CADE 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1421, pp. 129–133. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Meier, A., Melis, E. (2005). System Description: Multi A Multi-strategy Proof Planner. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (eds) Automated Deduction – CADE-20. CADE 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3632. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11532231_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11532231_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-28005-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31864-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)