Results 1  10
of
56
E  A Brainiac Theorem Prover
, 2002
"... We describe the superpositionbased theorem prover E. E is a sound and complete... ..."
Abstract

Cited by 179 (23 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe the superpositionbased theorem prover E. E is a sound and complete...
Lava: Hardware Design in Haskell
, 1998
"... Lava is a tool to assist circuit designers in specifying, designing, verifying and implementing hardware. It is a collection of Haskell modules. The system design exploits functional programming language features, such as monads and type classes, to provide multiple interpretations of circuit descri ..."
Abstract

Cited by 142 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Lava is a tool to assist circuit designers in specifying, designing, verifying and implementing hardware. It is a collection of Haskell modules. The system design exploits functional programming language features, such as monads and type classes, to provide multiple interpretations of circuit descriptions. These interpretations implement standard circuit analyses such as simulation, formal veri#cation and the generation of code for the production of real circuits.
User Interaction with the Matita Proof Assistant
 Journal of Automated Reasoning, Special
, 2006
"... Abstract. Matita is a new, documentcentric, tacticbased interactive theorem prover. This paper focuses on some of the distinctive features of the user interaction with Matita, mostly characterized by the organization of the library as a searchable knowledge base, the emphasis on a highquality not ..."
Abstract

Cited by 63 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Matita is a new, documentcentric, tacticbased interactive theorem prover. This paper focuses on some of the distinctive features of the user interaction with Matita, mostly characterized by the organization of the library as a searchable knowledge base, the emphasis on a highquality notational rendering, and the complex interplay between syntax, presentation, and semantics.
MetiTarski: An Automatic Theorem Prover for RealValued Special Functions
"... Abstract Many theorems involving special functions such as ln, exp and sin can be proved automatically by MetiTarski: a resolution theorem prover modified to call a decision procedure for the theory of real closed fields. Special functions are approximated by upper and lower bounds, which are typica ..."
Abstract

Cited by 44 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract Many theorems involving special functions such as ln, exp and sin can be proved automatically by MetiTarski: a resolution theorem prover modified to call a decision procedure for the theory of real closed fields. Special functions are approximated by upper and lower bounds, which are typically rational functions derived from Taylor or continued fraction expansions. The decision procedure simplifies clauses by deleting literals that are inconsistent with other algebraic facts. MetiTarski simplifies arithmetic expressions by conversion to a recursive representation, followed by flattening of nested quotients. Applications include verifying hybrid and control systems.
Ivy: A Preprocessor And Proof Checker For FirstOrder Logic
, 1999
"... This case study shows how nonACL2 programs can be combined with ACL2 functions in such a way that useful properties can be proved about the composite programs. Nothing is proved about the nonACL2 programs. Instead, the results of the nonACL2 programs are checked at run time by ACL2 functions, and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 38 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This case study shows how nonACL2 programs can be combined with ACL2 functions in such a way that useful properties can be proved about the composite programs. Nothing is proved about the nonACL2 programs. Instead, the results of the nonACL2 programs are checked at run time by ACL2 functions, and properties of these checker functions are proved. The application is resolution/paramodulation automated theorem proving for firstorder logic. The top ACL2 function takes a conjecture, preprocesses the conjecture, and calls a nonACL2 program to search for a proof or countermodel. If the nonACL2 program succeeds, ACL2 functions check the proof or countermodel. The top ACL2 function is proved sound with respect to finite interpretations. Introduction Our ACL2 project arose from a different kind of automated theorem proving. We work with fully automatic resolution/paramodulation theo This work was supported by the Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences Division subprogram...
Learning Search Control Knowledge for Equational Theorem Proving
 Fakultat fur Informatik, Technische Universitat Munchen
, 2001
"... One of the major problems in clausal theorem proving is the control of the proof search. In the presence of equality, this problem is particularly hard, since nearly all stateoftheart systems perform the proof search by saturating a mostly unstructured set of clauses. We describe an approach that ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
One of the major problems in clausal theorem proving is the control of the proof search. In the presence of equality, this problem is particularly hard, since nearly all stateoftheart systems perform the proof search by saturating a mostly unstructured set of clauses. We describe an approach that enables a superpositionbased prover to pick good clauses for generating inferences based on experiences from previous successful proof searches for other problems. Information about good and bad search decisions (useful and superfluous clauses) is automatically collected from search protocols and represented in the form of annotated clause patterns. At run time, new clauses are compared with stored patterns and evaluated according to the associated information found. We describe our implementation of the system. Experimental results demonstrate that a learned heuristic significantly outperforms the conventional base strategy, especially in domains where enough training examples are available.
Automatic Proofs and Counterexamples for Some Ortholattice Identities
 Information Processing Letters
, 1998
"... This note answers questions on whether three identities known to hold for orthomodular lattices are true also for ortholattices. One identity is shown to fail by MACE, a program that searches for counterexamples, an the other two are proved to hold by EQP, an equational theorem prover. The problems, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 25 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This note answers questions on whether three identities known to hold for orthomodular lattices are true also for ortholattices. One identity is shown to fail by MACE, a program that searches for counterexamples, an the other two are proved to hold by EQP, an equational theorem prover. The problems, from work in quantum logic, were given to us by Norman Megill. Keywords: Automatic theorem proving, ortholattice, quantum logic, theory of computation. 1 Introduction An ortholattice is an algebra with a binary operation (join) and a unary operation 0 (complement) satisfying the following (independent) set of identities. x y = (x 0 y 0 ) 0 (definition of meet) x y = y x (x y) z = x (y z) x (x y) = x x 00 = x x (y y 0 ) = y y 0 Supported by the Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences Division subprogram of the Office of Computational and Technology Research, U.S. Department of Energy, under Contract W31109Eng38. From these identities one can...
The Matita Interactive Theorem Prover
"... Abstract. Matita is an interactive theorem prover being developed by the Helm team at the University of Bologna. Its stable version 0.5.x may be downloaded at ..."
Abstract

Cited by 21 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Matita is an interactive theorem prover being developed by the Helm team at the University of Bologna. Its stable version 0.5.x may be downloaded at
AgentOriented Integration of Distributed Mathematical Services
 Journal of Universal Computer Science
, 1999
"... Realworld applications of automated theorem proving require modern software environments that enable modularisation, networked interoperability, robustness, and scalability. These requirements are met by the AgentOriented Programming paradigm of Distributed Artificial Intelligence. We argue that ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Realworld applications of automated theorem proving require modern software environments that enable modularisation, networked interoperability, robustness, and scalability. These requirements are met by the AgentOriented Programming paradigm of Distributed Artificial Intelligence. We argue that a reasonable framework for automated theorem proving in the large regards typical mathematical services as autonomous agents that provide internal functionality to the outside and that, in turn, are able to access a variety of existing external services. This article describes...
MetiTarski: An Automatic Prover for the Elementary Functions
"... Abstract. Many inequalities involving the functions ln, exp, sin, cos, etc., can be proved automatically by MetiTarski: a resolution theorem prover (Metis) modified to call a decision procedure (QEPCAD) for the theory of real closed fields. The decision procedure simplifies clauses by deleting liter ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Many inequalities involving the functions ln, exp, sin, cos, etc., can be proved automatically by MetiTarski: a resolution theorem prover (Metis) modified to call a decision procedure (QEPCAD) for the theory of real closed fields. The decision procedure simplifies clauses by deleting literals that are inconsistent with other algebraic facts, while deleting as redundant clauses that follow algebraically from other clauses. MetiTarski includes special code to simplify arithmetic expressions.