Results 11  20
of
169
Disunification: a Survey
 Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of Alan
, 1991
"... Solving an equation in an algebra of terms is known as unification. Solving more complex formulas combining equations and involving in particular negation is called disunification. With such a broad definition, many works fall into the scope of disunification. The goal of this paper is to survey the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 57 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Solving an equation in an algebra of terms is known as unification. Solving more complex formulas combining equations and involving in particular negation is called disunification. With such a broad definition, many works fall into the scope of disunification. The goal of this paper is to survey these works and bring them together in a same framework. R'esum'e On appelle habituellement (algorithme d') unification un algorithme de r'esolution d'une 'equation dans une alg`ebre de termes. La r'esolution de formules plus complexes, comportant en particulier des n'egations, est appel'ee ici disunification. Avec une d'efinition aussi 'etendue, de nombreux travaux peuvent etre consid'er'es comme portant sur la disunification. L'objet de cet article de synth`ese est de rassembler tous ces travaux dans un meme formalisme. Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique, Bat. 490, Universit'e de ParisSud, 91405 ORSAY cedex, France. Email: comon@lri.lri.fr i Contents 1 Syntax 5 1.1 Basic Defini...
Forming Concepts for Fast Inference
 In Proceedings of the Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI92
, 1992
"... Knowledge compilation speeds inference by creating tractable approximations of a knowledge base, but this advantage is lost if the approximations are too large. We show how learning concept generalizations can allow for a more compact representation of the tractable theory. We also give a general in ..."
Abstract

Cited by 49 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Knowledge compilation speeds inference by creating tractable approximations of a knowledge base, but this advantage is lost if the approximations are too large. We show how learning concept generalizations can allow for a more compact representation of the tractable theory. We also give a general induction rule for generating such concept generalizations. Finally, we prove that unless NP ` nonuniform P, not all theories have small Horn least upperbound approximations. 1 Introduction Work in machine learning has traditionally been divided into two main camps: concept learning (e.g. [ Kearns, 1990 ] ) and speedup learning (e.g. [ Minton, 1988 ] ). The work reported in this paper bridges these two areas by showing how concept learning can be used to speed up inference by allowing a more compact and efficient representation of a knowledge base. We have been studying techniques for boosting the performance of knowledge representation systems by compiling expressive but intractable repre...
Structured Theory Development for a Mechanized Logic
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1999
"... Experience has shown that large or multiuser interactive proof efforts can benefit significantly from structuring mechanisms, much like those available in many modern programming languages. Such a mechanism can allow some lemmas and definitions to be exported, and others not. In this paper we addre ..."
Abstract

Cited by 48 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Experience has shown that large or multiuser interactive proof efforts can benefit significantly from structuring mechanisms, much like those available in many modern programming languages. Such a mechanism can allow some lemmas and definitions to be exported, and others not. In this paper we address two such structuring mechanisms for the ACL2 theorem prover: encapsulation and books. After presenting an introduction to ACL2, this paper justifies the implementation of ACL2's structuring mechanisms and, more generally, formulates and proves highlevel correctness properties of ACL2. The issues in the present paper are relevant not only for ACL2 but also for other theoremproving environments.
Reasoning Theories  Towards an Architecture for Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems
, 1994
"... : Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems might be ..."
Abstract

Cited by 47 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
: Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems might be based on different logics; have different domain models; use different vocabularies and data structures; use different reasoning strategies; and have different interaction capabilities. This paper makes two main contributions towards our goal. First, it proposes a general architecture for a class of reasoning systems called Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems (OMRSs). An OMRS has three components: a reasoning theory component which is the counterpart of the logical notion of formal system, a control component which consists of a set of inference strategies, and an interaction component which provides an OMRS with the capability of interacting with other systems, including OMRSs and hum...
Uncertainty, Belief, and Probability
 Computational Intelligence
, 1989
"... : We introduce a new probabilistic approach to dealing with uncertainty, based on the observation that probability theory does not require that every event be assigned a probability. For a nonmeasurable event (one to which we do not assign a probability), we can talk about only the inner measure and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 46 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
: We introduce a new probabilistic approach to dealing with uncertainty, based on the observation that probability theory does not require that every event be assigned a probability. For a nonmeasurable event (one to which we do not assign a probability), we can talk about only the inner measure and outer measure of the event. In addition to removing the requirement that every event be assigned a probability, our approach circumvents other criticisms of probabilitybased approaches to uncertainty. For example, the measure of belief in an event turns out to be represented by an interval (defined by the inner and outer measure), rather than by a single number. Further, this approach allows us to assign a belief (inner measure) to an event E without committing to a belief about its negation :E (since the inner measure of an event plus the inner measure of its negation is not necessarily one). Interestingly enough, inner measures induced by probability measures turn out to correspond in a ...
Informationtheoretic Limitations of Formal Systems
 JOURNAL OF THE ACM
, 1974
"... An attempt is made to apply informationtheoretic computational complexity to metamathematics. The paper studies the number of bits of instructions that must be a given to a computer for it to perform finite and infinite tasks, and also the amount of time that it takes the computer to perform these ..."
Abstract

Cited by 45 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
An attempt is made to apply informationtheoretic computational complexity to metamathematics. The paper studies the number of bits of instructions that must be a given to a computer for it to perform finite and infinite tasks, and also the amount of time that it takes the computer to perform these tasks. This is applied to measuring the difficulty of proving a given set of theorems, in terms of the number of bits of axioms that are assumed, and the size of the proofs needed to deduce the theorems from the axioms.
Constructing Specification Morphisms
 Journal of Symbolic Computation
, 1993
"... This paper is part of a broader research program to explore a mechanizable model of software development based on algebraic specifications and specification morphisms. An algebraic specification (or simply a specification) defines a language and constrains its possible meanings via axioms and infere ..."
Abstract

Cited by 41 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper is part of a broader research program to explore a mechanizable model of software development based on algebraic specifications and specification morphisms. An algebraic specification (or simply a specification) defines a language and constrains its possible meanings via axioms and inference rules. Specifications can be used to express many kinds of softwarerelated artifacts, including domain models (Srinivas(1991)), formal requirements (Astesiano and Wirsing (1987), Ehrig and Mahr (1990), Partsch (1990), Sannella and Tarlecki (1985)), programming languages (Broy et al. (1987), Goguen and Winkler (1988), Hoare (1989)), abstract data types (Goguen et al. (1978), Guttag and Horning (1978)), and abstract algorithms (Smith and Lowry (1990)). There has been much work on operations for constructing larger specifications from smaller specifications (Astesiano and Wirsing (1987), Burstall and Goguen (1977), Sannella and Tarlecki (1988)). A specification morphism translates the language of one specification into the language of another specification in a way that preserves theorems. Specification morphisms underlie several aspects of software development, including specification refine
Active Logics: A Unified Formal Approach to Episodic Reasoning
"... Artificial intelligence research falls roughly into two categories: formal and implementational. This division is not completely firm: there are implementational studies based on (formal or informal) theories (e.g., CYC, SOAR, OSCAR), and there are theories framed with an eye toward implementabili ..."
Abstract

Cited by 35 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Artificial intelligence research falls roughly into two categories: formal and implementational. This division is not completely firm: there are implementational studies based on (formal or informal) theories (e.g., CYC, SOAR, OSCAR), and there are theories framed with an eye toward implementability (e.g., predicate circumscription). Nevertheless, formal /theoretical work tends to focus on very narrow problems (and even on very special cases of very narrow problems) while trying to get them "right" in a very strict sense, while implementational work tends to aim at fairly broad ranges of behavior but often at the expense of any kind of overall conceptually unifying framework that informs understanding. It is sometimes urged that this gap is intrinsic to the topic: intelligence is not a unitary thing for which there will be a unifying theory, but rather a "society" of subintelligences whose overall behavior cannot be reduced to useful characterizing and predictive principles.
Labelled Propositional Modal Logics: Theory and Practice
, 1996
"... We show how labelled deductive systems can be combined with a logical framework to provide a natural deduction implementation of a large and wellknown class of propositional modal logics (including K, D, T , B, S4, S4:2, KD45, S5). Our approach is modular and based on a separation between a base lo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show how labelled deductive systems can be combined with a logical framework to provide a natural deduction implementation of a large and wellknown class of propositional modal logics (including K, D, T , B, S4, S4:2, KD45, S5). Our approach is modular and based on a separation between a base logic and a labelling algebra, which interact through a fixed interface. While the base logic stays fixed, different modal logics are generated by plugging in appropriate algebras. This leads to a hierarchical structuring of modal logics with inheritance of theorems. Moreover, it allows modular correctness proofs, both with respect to soundness and completeness for semantics, and faithfulness and adequacy of the implementation. We also investigate the tradeoffs in possible labelled presentations: We show that a narrow interface between the base logic and the labelling algebra supports modularity and provides an attractive prooftheory (in comparision to, e.g., semantic embedding) but limits th...
On the computational content of the axiom of choice
 The Journal of Symbolic Logic
, 1998
"... We present a possible computational content of the negative translation of classical analysis with the Axiom of Choice. Our interpretation seems computationally more direct than the one based on Godel's Dialectica interpretation [10, 18]. Interestingly, thisinterpretation uses a re nement of the rea ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a possible computational content of the negative translation of classical analysis with the Axiom of Choice. Our interpretation seems computationally more direct than the one based on Godel's Dialectica interpretation [10, 18]. Interestingly, thisinterpretation uses a re nement of the realizibility semantics of the absurdity proposition, which is not interpreted as the empty type here. We alsoshowhow to compute witnesses from proofs in classical analysis, and how to interpret the axiom of Dependent Choice and Spector's Double Negation Shift.