Skip to main content
Log in

HARP: A tableau-based theorem prover

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents HARP, a complete, tableau-based theorem prover for first order logic, which is intended to be used both interactively and as an inference engine for Artificial Intelligence applications. Accordingly, HARP's construction is influenced by the design goals of ‘naturalness’, efficiency, usefulness in an Artificial Intelligence environment, and modifiability of the control structure by heuristics. To achieve these goals, HARP accepts the entire language of first order logic, i.e. avoids conversion to any kind of normal form, and combines a proof condensation procedure with explicitly represented, declaratively formulated heuristics to construct and communicate its proofs in a format congenial to people. The proof condensation procedure makes proof shorter and more readable by excising redundancies from proof trees. Domain-independent heuristics are formulated to capture efficient and human-like deduction strategies and to rapidly detect certain types of nontheorems. Domain-dependent heuristics can be used to implement specific control regimes, e.g. to efficiently support inheritance. HARP's architecture-and the concomitant ready extensibility of its control structure by declarative heuristic rules-renders it easy to let extralogical information, e.g. semantic and world knowledge, guide the search for proofs and help eliminate irrelevant premisses.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrews P. B. ‘Theorem Proving via General Matings’ J. ACM 28(2), pp. 193–214 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beth E. W. ‘Semantic Entailment and Formal Derivability’, Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, 18, pp. 309–342, Amsterdam (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beth E. W. The Foundations of Mathematics. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bibel W. ‘On Matrices with Connections’, J.ACM 28, pp. 633–645 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bibel W. ‘A Comparative Study of Several Proof Procedures’, Artificial Intelligence 18, pp. 269–293 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bibel, W. ‘Matings in Matrices’. In: C. Montgomery, F. Fosdick, eds., Research Contributions. Artificial Intelligence and Language Processing. CACM 26, 11, pp. 844–852 (1983).

  7. Bledsoe, W. W. The UT Interactive Prover. University of Texas at Austin, ATP-17B, 1983.

  8. Cohen D. N., Knowledge Based Theorem Proving and Learning. UMI Research Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cohn, A. G. ‘On the solution of Schubert's Steamroller in Many Sorted Logic’. IJCA185, pp. 1169–1173.

  10. Fitting M. C. ‘Tableau Methods of Proof for Modal Logics’, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 13, pp. 237–247 (1972).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fitting M. C. ‘A Tableau System for Propositional SS’. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 18, pp. 292–294 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fitting M. C. Proof Methods for Modal and Intuitionistic Logics, Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hayes, P. J. ‘The Logic of Frames.’ In: D. Metzing. ed. Frame Conceptions and Text Understanding. pp. 46–61 (1979).

  14. Hintikka, J. Distributive Normal Forms in the Calculus of Predicates. Acta Philosophica Fennica 6, Helsinki (1953).

  15. Hintikka, J. Form and Content in Quantification Theory. Acta Philosophica Fennica 8, Helsinki (1955).

  16. Hintikka J. Logic, Language Games, and Information: Kantian Themes in the Philosophy of Logic. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1973a).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hintikka, J. ‘An Analysis of Analyticity’, [Hintikka 73a], ch. 6. (1973b).

  18. Hintikka, J. ‘Kant Vindicated’, [Hintikka 73a], ch. 8 (1973c).

  19. Hintikka, J. ‘Kant and the Tradition of Analysis’. [Hintikka 73a], ch. 9. (1973d).

  20. Hintikka, J. ‘Information, Deduction and the A-priori’. [Hintikka 73a], ch. 10. (1973e).

  21. Hintikka J. ‘Surface Semantics: Definition and its Motivation’. In: H.Leblanc, ed. Truth. Syntax and Modality. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1973f).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jeffrey R. C. Formal Logic: its Scope and Limits. McGraw-Hill, New York (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kalish D., Montague R. Logic. Techniques of Formal Reasoning. Harcourt, Brace & World, New York (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kowalski R. ‘A Proof Procedure Using Connection Graphs’. Journal of the ACM 22, pp. 572–595 (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Loveland D. Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis. North Holland, New York (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moore, R. C. ‘The Role of Logic in Knowledge Representation and Commonsense Reasoning’. AAAI-82, pp. 428–433 (1982).

  27. Murray N. V. ‘Completely Non-Clausal Theorem Proving’. Artificial Intelligence 18, pp. 67–85 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nilsson N. Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Tioga, Palo Alto (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Robinson J. A. Logic: Form and Function. North Holland, New York (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schonfeld, W. ‘Proof Search for Unprovable Formulas’. German Workshop in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 207–215 (1983).

  31. Schonfeld, W. ‘Prolog extensions based on Tableau Calculus’. IJCAI 85, pp. 730–732 (1985).

  32. Smullyan R. M. ‘A Unifying Principle in Quantification Theory’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 49, pp. 828–832 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Smullyan R. M. ‘Analytic Natural Deduction’. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 30, pp. 123–139 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Smullyan R. M. ‘Trees and Nest Structures’. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 31, pp. 303–321 (1966).

    Google Scholar 

  35. R. M.Smullyan, First-Order Logic. Springer Verlag, Berlin (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stegmuller W., v.Kibed M. V. Strukturtypen der Logik. Springer-Verlag, New York (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Walther C. ‘A many-sorted calculus based on resolution and paramodulation’. IJCAI 83, 2, pp. 882–891 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Walther, C. ‘A mechanical Solution of Schubert's Steamroller by Many-Sorted Resolution’, Artificial Intelligence. pp. 217–224 (May 1985).

  39. Wrightson G. Semantic Tableaux, Unification and Links. Technical Report CSD-ANZARP-84–001, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand, 1984 a.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wrightson G. Non-classical Theorem Proving using Links and Unification in Semantic Tableaux. TR CSD-ANZARP-84–003, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand, 1984b.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wrightson, G. ‘Non-Classical Logic Theorem proving.’ in L. Wos et. al. An Overview of Automated Reasoning’. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1, pp. 5–48 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oppacher, F., Suen, E. HARP: A tableau-based theorem prover. J Autom Reasoning 4, 69–100 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00244513

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00244513

Key words

Navigation