Skip to main content
Log in

A note on assumptions about Skolem functions

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

Abstract

Skolemization is not an equivalence preserving transformation. For the purposes of refutational theorem proving it is sufficient that skolemization preserves satisfiability and unsatisfiability. Therefore there is sometimes some freedom in interpreting Skolem functions in a particular way. We show that in certain cases it is possible to exploit this freedom for simplifying formulae considerably. Examples for cases where this occurs systematically are the relational translation from modal logics to predicate logic and the relativization of first-order logics with sorts.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chellas, B. F.:Modal Logic, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Loveland, D.:Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis, Vol. 6 ofFundamental Studies in Computer Science, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  3. McCune, W.: Otter 2.0, in10th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, CADE-10, Vol. 449 ofLNCS, Springer, 1990, pp. 663–664.

  4. Nonnengart, A.: First-order modal logic theorem proving and functional simulation, inProc. of 13th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-93, Morgan Kaufmann, 1993, pp. 80–85.

  5. Ohlbach, Hans Jürgen: Semantics-based translation methods for modal logics,J. Logic and Computation 1(5) (1991), 691–746.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pelletier, F. J.: Seventy-five problems for testing automatic theorem provers,J. Automated Reasoning 2(2) (1986), 191–216, Errata:J. Automated Reasoning 4(2) (1988), 235–236.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Scherl, R. B.: A constrained logic approach to automated modal deduction, Internal Report UIUCDCS-R-93-1803, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, May 1993.

  8. Schmidt-Schauß, M.:Computational Aspects of an Order Sorted Logic with Term Declarations, Vol. 395 ofLNAI, Springer, 1989.

  9. Walther, C.:A Many-sorted Calculus based on Resolution and Paramodulation, Research Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Pitman Ltd., 1987.

  10. Weidenbach, C.: A sorted logic using dynamic sorts, MPI-Report MPI-I-91-218, Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrücken, December 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Weidenbach, C.: Extending the resolution method with sorts, inProc. of 13th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-93, Morgan Kaufmann, 1993, pp. 60–65.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ohlbach, H.J., Weidenbach, C. A note on assumptions about Skolem functions. J Autom Reasoning 15, 267–275 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00881919

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00881919

Key words

Navigation