## Theorem Proving in Large Theories (1998)

### Cached

### Download Links

Venue: | IN PROC. FTP’97 |

Citations: | 24 - 5 self |

### BibTeX

@INPROCEEDINGS{Reif98theoremproving,

author = {Wolfgang Reif and Gerhard Schellhorn},

title = {Theorem Proving in Large Theories},

booktitle = {IN PROC. FTP’97},

year = {1998},

pages = {119--124},

publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers}

}

### Years of Citing Articles

### OpenURL

### Abstract

### Citations

1614 | The Definition of Standard ML - MILNER, TOFTE, et al. - 1990 |

101 | The TPTP problem library
- Sutclie, Suttner
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...neral result of the experiments we found that the automated provers did not satisfy the expectations induced by the good results some of them normally get in standard benchmarks from the TPTP library =-=[13-=-]. In our experiments either the success rate was rather low or the required time was unexpectedly high. One major reason for this behavior is the large number of axioms in typical software specicatio... |

55 | Spass & flotter version 0.42
- Weidenbach, Gaede, et al.
- 1996
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specication- and program properties in KIV. Thesve provers were Otter [16], Protein [2], SETHEO [4], Spass [=-=14]-=- and 3 T A P [3]. The experiments were performed in the context of a joint project between the research groups of 3 T A P and KIV at the Universities of Karlsruhe and Ulm on the conceptual integration... |

43 | CoFI: The Common Framework Initiative for Algebraic Specification and Development
- Mosses
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...even the structure of an implementation by a system of software modules follows the structure of the specication (see [8] for details). The specication is then called an architectural specication ([6]). For a modular specication we can now prove the following criteria for the reduction of axioms: { minimality criterion. To prove a theorem one never needs more axioms than those of the minimal subs... |

40 | PROTEIN: A PROver with a theory extension INterface
- Baumgartner, Furbach
- 1994
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specication- and program properties in KIV. Thesve provers were Otter [16], Protein [=-=2]-=-, SETHEO [4], Spass [14] and 3 T A P [3]. The experiments were performed in the context of a joint project between the research groups of 3 T A P and KIV at the Universities of Karlsruhe and Ulm on th... |

34 | The KIV Approach to Software Verification
- Reif
- 1995
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...chellhorn Universitat Ulm 1 Introduction This paper investigates the performance of automated first-order theorem provers in formal software verification. We used the software verification tool, KIV (=-=[5]-=-, [6]) as a test environment, and did comparative experiments with five automated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductive first-order theorems that showed up during proofs of spe... |

31 | P.H.: Integrating automated and interactive theorem proving
- Ahrendt, Beckert, et al.
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... and Ulm on the conceptual integration of interactive and automated theorem proving. In this project we use KIV and 3 T A P as an experimental platform (for other results of this project, see Chapter =-=[1]-=-). Therefore, 3 T A P could be called from inside KIV, whereas for the other provers the problems had to be transferred by hand. As a general result of the experiments we found that the automated prov... |

31 | Reasoning about Abstract State Machines: The WAM Case Study
- Schellhorn, Ahrendt
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...rems was reduced by a factor of three on average. As a second case study we considered 54 simple non inductive first-order theorems that showed up during the verification of a Prolog compiler in KIV (=-=[7]-=-). These are formulated over a specification which is built up from a lot of standard datatypes (lists, tuples, pairs etc.).Therefore the specification structure contains many different sorts, but the... |

19 |
The KIV Approach to Software Veri
- Reif
- 1995
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ivation behind this chapter is the question: how can formal software verication benet from automatedsrst-order theorem proving? To answer the question we used the software verication tool KIV [9], [8], [10] as a test environment. We did comparative experiments withsve automated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specicatio... |

19 | Interactive Correctness Proofs for Software Modules Using KIV
- Reif, Schellhorn, et al.
- 1995
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...e motivation behind this chapter is the question: how can formal software verication benet from automatedsrst-order theorem proving? To answer the question we used the software verication tool KIV [9], [8], [10] as a test environment. We did comparative experiments withsve automated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of speci... |

14 | W.: The WAM case study: Verifying compiler correctness for Prolog with KIV
- Schellhorn, Ahrendt
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...lts for the compiler verication example As a second case study we considered 54 simple non-inductivesrst-order theorems that showed up during the verication of a Prolog compiler in KIV (see Chapter [11]). These are formulated over a specication which is built up from a lot of standard datatypes (lists, tuples, pairs etc.) in various dierent instantiations. Therefore the specication structure cont... |

13 | Setheo v3.2: Recent developments — system abstract
- Goller, Letz, et al.
- 1994
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specication- and program properties in KIV. Thesve provers were Otter [16], Protein [2], SETHEO [=-=4]-=-, Spass [14] and 3 T A P [3]. The experiments were performed in the context of a joint project between the research groups of 3 T A P and KIV at the Universities of Karlsruhe and Ulm on the conceptual... |

12 |
Proving System Correctness with KIV 3.0
- Reif, Schellhorn, et al.
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...horn Universitat Ulm 1 Introduction This paper investigates the performance of automated first-order theorem provers in formal software verification. We used the software verification tool, KIV ([5], =-=[6]-=-) as a test environment, and did comparative experiments with five automated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductive first-order theorems that showed up during proofs of specific... |

12 |
Algebraic Specification, volume B of Handbook of Theoretical
- Wirsing
- 1990
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...rdering !. The enrichments Add and Sub introduce addition and subtraction by recursive definitions. Nat is the union of Add and Sub. The formal semantics of the specification language is described in =-=[10]-=-. The specification DelEnum (inclusive of all subspecifications) has 25 axioms, 13 of which are given in Fig. 1. Furthermore, the specification Nat from the library is associated with 77 additional st... |

11 |
The tableau-based theorem prover 3 T A P , version 4.0
- Beckert, Hahnle, et al.
- 1996
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...tems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specication- and program properties in KIV. Thesve provers were Otter [16], Protein [2], SETHEO [4], Spass [14] and 3 T A P [=-=3]-=-. The experiments were performed in the context of a joint project between the research groups of 3 T A P and KIV at the Universities of Karlsruhe and Ulm on the conceptual integration of interactive ... |

5 |
Correctness of full first-order specifications
- Reif
- 1992
(Show Context)
Citation Context .... The enrichments Add and Sub introduce addition and subtraction by recursive definitions.sNat is the union of Add and Sub. The formal semantics of the specification language is described in [Wir90], =-=[Rei92]-=-. The specification DelEnum (inclusive of all subspecifications) has 17 axioms that are directly given in Fig. 1. 8 axioms are generated automatically for the data specification NatBasic. Furthermore,... |

3 | Proving Properties of Finite Enumerations: A Problem Set for Automated Theorem Provers. Ulmer Informatik-Berichte 97-12, Universitat Ulm, Fakultat fur Informatik
- Schellhorn, Reif
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... computed from this table (with Eval) in 0.1 - 0.2 seconds. The results are summarized in Table 1 (a full listing of all axioms and theorems, as well as a full account of all proof times, is given in =-=[12]-=-). Thesrst line in the table gives the number of theorems which could be proved with the full set of axioms, the second line gives the number for the reduced set of axioms. The numbers show that all p... |

3 |
Algebraic Speci volume B of Handbook of Theoretical
- Wirsing
- 1990
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...tomatically. The enrichments Add and Sub introduce addition and subtraction by recursive denitions.sNat is the union of Add and Sub. The formal semantics of the specication language is described in [15], [7]. The specication DelEnum (inclusive of all subspecications) has 17 axioms that are directly given in Fig. 3. 8 axioms are generated automatically for the data specication NatBasic in Fig. 2. ... |

3 |
for the newest version of OTTER, see the URL: http://www.mcs.anl.gov/home/mccune/ar/otter/#doc
- Wos, Overbeek, et al.
- 1992
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... withsve automated theorem provers as dedicated subsystems for the non-inductivesrst-order goals that showed up during proofs of specication- and program properties in KIV. Thesve provers were Otter [=-=16]-=-, Protein [2], SETHEO [4], Spass [14] and 3 T A P [3]. The experiments were performed in the context of a joint project between the research groups of 3 T A P and KIV at the Universities of Karlsruhe ... |

1 |
Correctness of Full First-Order Speci
- Reif
- 1992
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...cally. The enrichments Add and Sub introduce addition and subtraction by recursive denitions.sNat is the union of Add and Sub. The formal semantics of the specication language is described in [15], [7]. The specication DelEnum (inclusive of all subspecications) has 17 axioms that are directly given in Fig. 3. 8 axioms are generated automatically for the data specication NatBasic in Fig. 2. Furth... |