Skip to main content

Computational representations of herbrand models using grammars

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computer Science Logic (CSL 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1258))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Finding computationally valuable representations of models of predicate logic formulas is an important subtask in many fields related to automated theorem proving, e.g. automated model building or semantic resolution. In this article we investigate the use of context-free languages for representing single Herbrand models, which appear to be a natural extension of “linear atomic representations” already known from the literature. We focus on their expressive power (which we find out to be exactly the finite models) and on algorithmic issues like clause evaluation and equivalence test (which we solve by using a resolution theorem prover), thus proving our approach to be an interesting base for investigating connections between formal language theory and automated theorem proving and model building.

Inst. f. Informationssysteme, Abt. f. Wissensbasierte Systeme; Treitlstr. 3/E184-3, A-1040 Wien/Austria/Europe

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. C. Bourely, R. Caferra, and N. Peltier. A method for building models automatically. Experiments with an extension of otter. In Alan Bundy, editor, 12th International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 72–86, Nancy/France, June 1994. Springer Verlag, LNAI 814.

    Google Scholar 

  2. G. Boolos and R. Jeffrey. Computability and Logic. Cambridge University Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  3. H. Chen, J. Hsiang, and H.-C. Kong. On finite representations of infinite sequences of terms. In S. Kaplan and M. Okada, editors, Proceedings 2nd International Workshop on Conditional and Typed Rewriting Systems, Montreal (Canada), volume 516 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 100–114. Springer, June 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. C.-L. Chang and R. C. T. Lee. Symbolic Logic an Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, New York, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. Comon. On unification of terms with integer exponents. Mathematical Systems Theory, 28(1):67–88, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Caferra and N. Zabel. A method for simultanous search for refutations and models by equational constraint solving. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 13(6):613–641, June 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. Fermüller. Deciding some Horn clause sets by resolution. In Yearbook of the Kurt-Gödel-Society 1989, pages 60–73, Vienna, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. Fermüller and A. Leitsch. Model building by resolution. In Computer Science Logic (CSL'92), pages 134–148, San Miniato, Italy, 1993. Springer Verlag. LNCS 702.

    Google Scholar 

  9. C. Fermüller and A. Leitsch. Hyperresolution and automated model building. J. of Logic and Computation, 6(2):173–203, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  10. C. Fermüller, A. Leitsch, T. Tammet, and N. Zamov. Resolution Methods for the Decision Problem. Springer Verlag, 1993. LNAI 679.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. Gécseg and M. Steinby. Tree Automata. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Hermann and R. Galbavý. Unification of infinite sets of terms schematized by primal grammars. Theoretical Computer Science, 176, April 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  13. W.H. Joyner. Resolution strategies as decision procedures. Journal of ACM, 23(1):398–417, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Loveland. Automated Theorem Proving — A Logical Basis. North Holland, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. McAllester. Grammar rewriting. In D. Kapur, editor, Proceedings 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Saratoga Springs, (New York, USA), volume 607 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (in Art. Intelligence). Springer, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa, editors. Lindenmayer Systems. Springer, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Salomaa. Formal languages. Academic Press, Orlando, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  18. G. Salzer. The unification of infinite sets of terms and its applications. In A. Voronkov, editor, Proceedings Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, St. Petersburg (Russia), volume 624 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (in Art. Intelligence). Springer, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Slaney. FINDER (finite domain enumerator): Notes and guide. Technical Report TR-ARP-1/92, Australien National University Automated Reasoning Project, Canberra, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. Slaney. SCOTT: A model-guided theorem prover. In Proceedings of the 13th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI'93), volume 1, pages 109–114. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Dirk van Dalen Marc Bezem

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Matzinger, R. (1997). Computational representations of herbrand models using grammars. In: van Dalen, D., Bezem, M. (eds) Computer Science Logic. CSL 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1258. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63172-0_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63172-0_48

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63172-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69201-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics