Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tactic-based theorem proving and knowledge-based forward chaining: An experiment with Nuprl and Ontic

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Deduction—CADE-11 (CADE 1992)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 607))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We explore a new approach to interactive theorem proving which combines a knowledge-based notion of obvious reasoning with a tactic-based notion of obvious reasoning. We study the interplay of two particular systems and apply our approach to a proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic. We achieve both shorter and more robust proofs. It is our opinion that the kind of control information contained in interactive proofs is a more important issue than their mere size. We analyze our proof scripts in terms of the control information they contain and suggest that stronger knowledge-based notions of obviousness and declarative representations of tactics are needed to further reduce low-level control information.

The author would like to acknowledge support for this work under NSF grant CCR-9108062 and ONR grant N000014-88K-0409.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. D. Basin. An environment for automated reasoning about partial functions. In R. Lusk and R. Overbeek, editors, Ninth International Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 310 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 101–110. Springer Verlag, May 1988. Also as Cornell CS TR 87-884.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, J. Hesketh, and A. Smaill. Experiments with proof plans for induction. Journal of Automated Reasoning, page (in press) Earlier version available from Edinburgh as Research Paper No 413, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alan Bundy. The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In R. Lusk and R. Overbeek, editors, Ninth International Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 310 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 111–120. Springer Verlag, 1988. Longer version available from Edinburgh as Research Paper No. 349.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alan Bundy. A science of reasoning. In J.-L. Lassez and G. Plotkin, editors, Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of Alan Robinson, pages 178–198. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Alan Bundy. The use of proof plans for normalization. Report, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wilfred Chen. Tactic-based theorem proving and knowledge-based forward chaining: an experiment with Nuprl and Ontic. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, March 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leslie Paul Chew. An improved algorithm for computing with equations. In the 21st Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science, pages 108–117. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Robert L. Constable, Scott D. Johnson, and Carl D. Eichenlaub. Introduction to the PL/CV2 Programming Logic, volume 135 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Robert L. Constable, et al. Implementing Mathematics with the Nuprl Proof Development System. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Peter J. Downey, Ravi Sethi, and Robert E. Tarjan. Variations on the common subex-pression problem. JACM, 27(4):758–771, October 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Felty and D. Miller. Specifying theorem provers in a higher-order logic programming language. In R. Lusk and R. Overbeek, editors, Ninth International Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 310 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 61–80. Springer Verlag, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Gordon. A proof generating system for higher-order logic. In Proceedings of the Hardware Verification Workshop, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Michael J. Gordon, Robin Milner, and Christopher P. Wadsworth. Edinburgh LCF: A Mechanized Logic of Computation, volume 78 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. J. Howe. Automating Reasoning in an Implementation of Constructive Type Theory. PhD thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, April 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Douglas J. Howe. Implementing number theory, an experiment with Nuprl. In Eighth International Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 230 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 404–415. Springer Verlag, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Douglas J. Howe. Equality in lazy computation systems. In Proceedings of the Fourth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 198–203. IEEE Computer Society, June 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dexter C. Kozen. Complexity of finitely presented algebras. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Compututation, pages 164–177, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. McAllester, R. Givan, and T. Fatima. Taxonomic syntax for first order inference. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 289–300, 1989. To Appear in JACM.

    Google Scholar 

  19. David McAllester. Ontic: A Knowledge Representation System For Mathematics. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  20. David McAllester. Automatic recognition of tractability in inference relations. Memo 1215, MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, February 1990. To appear in JACM.

    Google Scholar 

  21. David McAllester. Some observations on cognitive judgements. In AAAI-91, pages 910–915. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, July 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  22. David A. McAllester. Grammar rewriting. In Eleventh International Conference on Automated Deduction. Springer Verlag, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. C. Murthy. An evaluation semantics for classical proofs. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 96–107, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jeffery F. Naughton and Taghu Ramakrishnan. Bottom-up evaluation of logic programs. In J.-L. Lassez and G. Plotkin, editors, Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of Alan Robinson, pages 640–700. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Greg Nelson. Combining satisfiability procedures by equality-sharing. In Automated Theorem Proving: After 25 Years, pages 201–211. American Mathematical Society, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Greg Nelson and Derek Oppen. Fast decision procedures based on congruence closure. JACM, 27(2):356–364, April 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  27. L. Paulson. Isabelle: The next 700 theorem provers. In P. Odifreddi, editor, Logic and Computer Science, pages 361–385. Academic Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  28. David J. Sherman. Lazy directed congruence closure. Tech report 90-028, University of Chicago, September 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mark E. Stickel. Upside-down meta-interpretation of the model elimination theorem proving procedure for deduction and abduction. Technical Report TR-664, Institute for New Generation Computer Technology, Tokyo, Japan, May 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Jeffery D. Ullman. Principles of Database and Knowledge-base Systems. Computer Science Press, 1989. Chapter 13.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, 14853, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Wilfred Z. Chen

Authors
  1. Wilfred Z. Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Deepak Kapur

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chen, W.Z. (1992). Tactic-based theorem proving and knowledge-based forward chaining: An experiment with Nuprl and Ontic. In: Kapur, D. (eds) Automated Deduction—CADE-11. CADE 1992. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 607. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55602-8_191

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55602-8_191

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-55602-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47252-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation