Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The search efficiency of theorem proving strategies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Deduction — CADE-12 (CADE 1994)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 814))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We analyze the search efficiency of a number of common refutational theorem proving strategies for first-order logic. We show that most of them produce search spaces of exponential size even on simple sets of clauses, or else are not sensitive to the goal. We also discuss clause linking, a new procedure that uses a reduction to propositional calculus, and show that it, together with methods that cache subgoals, have behavior that is more favorable in some respects.

This research was partially supported by the National Science Foundation under grant CCR-9108904

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. Owen Astrachan and M. Stickel. Caching and lemma use in model elimination theorem provers. In D. Kapur, editor, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Automated Deduction, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Leo Bachmair and Harold Ganzinger. On restrictions of ordered paramodulation with simplification. In Mark Stickel, editor, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 427–441, New York, 1990. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  3. W. Bibel. Automated Theorem Proving. Vieweg, Braunschweig/Weisbaden, 1987. second edition.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Bundy. The Computer Modelling of Mathematical Reasoning. Academic Press, New York, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Chang and R. Lee. Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, New York, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  6. S. A. Cook and R. Reckhow. The relative efficiency of propositional proof systems. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 44(1):36–50, March 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 7:201–215, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E. Eder. Relative Complexities of First-Order Calculi. Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. Haken. The intractability of resolution. Theoretical Computer Science, 39:297–308, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Hsiang and M Rusinowitch. Proving refutational completeness of theorem-proving strategies: the transfinite semantic tree method. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 38(3):559–587, July 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Kleine Buening and T. Lettman. Search space and average proof length of resolution. Unpublished, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. E. Korf. Depth-first iterative deepening: An optimal admissible tree search. Artificial Intelligence, 27:97–109, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Letz. On the polynomial transparency of resolution. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 123–129, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J.W. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987. 2nd edn.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Loveland. A simplified format for the model elimination procedure. J. ACM, 16:349–363, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Loveland. Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis. North-Holland, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  17. S.-J. Lee and D. Plaisted. Eliminating duplication with the hyper-linking strategy. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 9(1):25–42, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Plaisted. A simplified problem reduction format. Artificial Intelligence, 18:227–261, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. Plaisted. Non-Horn clause logic programming without contrapositives. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 4:287–325, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. Robinson. Automatic deduction with hyper-resolution. Int. J. Comput. Math., 1:227–234, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J.R. Slagle. Automatic theorem proving with renameable and semantic resolution. J. ACM, 14:687–697, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  22. M.E. Stickel and W.M. Tyson. An analysis of consecutively bounded depth-first search with applications in automated deduction. In Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1073–1075, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  23. T. Tammet. The resolution program: able to decide some solvable classes. In International Conference on Computer Logic, 1988, pages 300–312, 1990. Springer Verlag LNCS 417.

    Google Scholar 

  24. T. Tammet. Using resolution for deciding solvable classes and building finite models. In Baltic Computer Science, pages 33–64, 1991. Springer Verlag LNCS 502.

    Google Scholar 

  25. A. Urquhart. Hard examples for resolution. J. ACM, 34(1):209–219, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  26. L. Wos, R. Overbeek, E. Lusk, and J. Boyle. Automated Reasoning: Introduction and Applications. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  27. L. Wos, G. Robinson, and D. Carson. Efficiency and completeness of the set of support strategy in theorem proving. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 12:536–541, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  28. N.K. Zamov. On a bound for the complexity of terms in the resolution method. Trudy. Mat. Inst. Steklov, 128:5–13, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  29. N.K. Zamov. Maslov's inverse method and decidable classes. Annals of pure and applied logic, 42:165–194, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 27599-3175, Chapel Hill, NC

    David A. Plaisted

  2. MPI fuer Informatik, Im Stadtwald, D-66123, Saarbruecken

    David A. Plaisted

  3. Fachbereich Informatik, Universitaet Kaiserslautern, 675, Kaiserslautern

    David A. Plaisted

Authors
  1. David A. Plaisted
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Alan Bundy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Plaisted, D.A. (1994). The search efficiency of theorem proving strategies. In: Bundy, A. (eds) Automated Deduction — CADE-12. CADE 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 814. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58156-1_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58156-1_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58156-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-48467-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation