Skip to main content

Synthesis and Transformation of Logic Programs from Constructive, Inductive Proof

  • Conference paper
Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation

Part of the book series: Workshops in Computing ((WORKSHOPS COMP.))

Abstract

We discuss a technique which allows synthesis of logic programs in the “proofs-as-programs” paradigm [Constable 82]. Constructive, inductive proof is used to show that the specification of a program is realisable; elaboration of a proof gives rise to the synthesis of a program which realises it. We present an update on earlier ideas, and give examples of and justification for them. The work is presented as foundation for further work in proof planning, where we aim to synthesise not only programs, but good programs.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. W. Bibel and K.M. Horning. Lops — a system based on a strategical approach to program synthesis. In A. Biermann, G. Guiho, and Y. Kodratoff, editors, Automatic Program Construction Techniques, pages 69-90. MacMillan, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 88] A. Bundy. The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In R. Lusk and R. Overbeek, editors, 9th Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 111-120. Springer-Verlag, 1988. Longer version available from Edinburgh as Research Paper No. 349.

    Google Scholar 

  3. [Bundy et al 88]_A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, J. Hesketh, and A. Smaill. Experiments with proof plans for induction. Research Paper 413, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, 1988. To appear in JAR.

    Google Scholar 

  4. [Bundy et al 90a]_A. Bundy, A. Smaill, and G. Wiggins. The synthesis of logic programs from inductive proofs. In J. Lloyd, editor, Computational Logic, pages 135-149. Springer-Verlag, 1990. Esprit Basic Research Series. Also available from Edinburgh as DAI Research Paper 501.

    Google Scholar 

  5. [Bundy et al 90b]_A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, A. Smaill, and A. Ireland. Extensions to the rippling-out tactic for guiding inductive proofs. In M.E. Stickel, editor, 10th International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 132-146. Springer-Verlag, 1990. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 449.

    Google Scholar 

  6. [Bundy et al 90c]_A. Bundy, van Harmelen. F., C. Horn, and A. Smaill. The Oyster-Clam system. In M.E. Stickel, editor, 10th International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 647-648, Springer-Verlag, 1990. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 449.

    Google Scholar 

  7. [Bundy et al 91]_A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, J. Hesketh, and A. Smaill. Experiments with proof plans for induction. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1991. In press. Earlier version available from Edinburgh as Research Paper No 413.

    Google Scholar 

  8. [Bundy et al ng]_A. Bundy, A. Stevens, F. van Harmelen, A. Ireland, and A. Smaill. Rippling: A heuristic for guiding inductive proofs. Research paper, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.L. Constable. Programs as proofs. Technical Report TR 82-532, Dept. of Computer Science, Cornell University, November 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  10. L. Fribourg. Extracting logic programs from proofs that use extended prolog execution and induction. In Proceedings of Eighth International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 685–699. MIT Press, June 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. Horn. The Nurprl proof development system. Working paper 214, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, 1988. The Edinburgh version of Nurprl has been renamed Oyster.

    Google Scholar 

  12. P. Madden. Automated Program Transformation Through Proof Transformation. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  13. G. Wiggins. The improvement of prolog program efficiency by compiling control: A proof-theoretic view. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Meta-programming in Logic, Leuven, Beglium, April 1990. Also available from Edinburgh as DAI Research Paper No. 455.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag London

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wiggins, G., Kraan, I., Bundy, A., Hesketh, J. (1992). Synthesis and Transformation of Logic Programs from Constructive, Inductive Proof. In: Clement, T.P., Lau, KK. (eds) Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation. Workshops in Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3494-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3494-7_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-19742-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-3494-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics