Abstract
The importance of models within automated deduction is generally acknowledged both in constructing countermodels (rather than just giving the answer “NO”, if a given formula is found to be not a theorem) and in speeding up the deduction process itself (e.g. by semantic resolution refinement).
However, little attention has been paid so far to the efficiency of algorithms to actually work with models. There are two fundamental decision problems as far as models are concerned, namely: the equivalence of 2 models and the truth evaluation of an arbitrary clause within a given model. This paper focuses on the efficiency of algorithms for these problems in case of Herbrand models given through atomic representations. Both problems have been shown to be coNP-hard in [Got 97], so there is a certain limit to the efficiency that we can possibly expect. Nevertheless, what we can do is find out the real “source” of complexity and make use of this theoretical result for devising an algorithm which, in general, has a considerably smaller upper bound on the complexity than previously known algorithms, e.g.: the partial saturation method in [FL 96] and the transformation to equational problems in [CZ 91].
The main result of this paper are algorithms for these two decision problems, where the complexity depends non-polynomially on the number of atoms (rather than on the total size) of the input model equivalence problem or clause evaluation problem, respectively. Hence, in contrast to the above mentioned algorithms, the complexity of the expressions involved (e.g.: the arity of the predicate symbols and, in particular, the term depth of the arguments) only has polynomial influence on the overall complexity of the algorithms.
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
H. Comon, P. Lescanne: Equational Problems and Disunification, Journal of Symbolic Computation, Vol 7, pp. 371–425 (1989).
R. Caferra, N. Zabel: Extending Resolution for Model Construction, in Proceedings of JELIA’ 90, LNAI 478, pp. 153–169, Springer (1991).
C. Fermüller, A. Leitsch: Hyperresolution and Automated Model Building, Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol 6 No 2, pp. 173–230 (1996).
G. Gottlob: The Equivalence Problem for Herbrand Interpretations, unpublished note (1997).
A. Leitsch: The Resolution Calculus, Texts in Theoretical Computer Science, Springer (1997).
J.-L. Lassez, K. Marriott: Explicit Representation of Terms defined by Counter Examples, Journal of Automated Reasoning, Vol 3, pp. 301–317 (1987).
R. Matzinger: Comparing Computational Representations of Herbrand Models, in Proceedings of KGC’97, LNCS 1289, Springer (1997).
R. Pichler: Algorithms on Atomic Representations of Herbrand Models, technical report TR-CS-RP-98-1 of the Technical University of Vienna, available as ftp://ftp.logic.at/pub/reini/armod.ps (1998).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pichler, R. (1998). Algorithms on Atomic Representations of Herbrand Models. In: Dix, J., del Cerro, L.F., Furbach, U. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1489. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65141-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49545-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive