Results 1  10
of
3,559
Proof Procedures for Logic Programming
, 1994
"... Proof procedures are an essential part of logic applied to artificial intelligence tasks, and form the basis for logic programming languages. As such, many of the chapters throughout this handbook utilize, or study, proof procedures. The study of proof procedures that are useful in artificial intell ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Proof procedures are an essential part of logic applied to artificial intelligence tasks, and form the basis for logic programming languages. As such, many of the chapters throughout this handbook utilize, or study, proof procedures. The study of proof procedures that are useful in artificial
Structured Proof Procedures
 OF STRUCTURED PROOF PROCEDURES, THIRD BARILAN SYMPOSIUM ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. ALSO DISTTECHNICAL REPORT 930015
, 1993
"... In this paper we address the problem of enriching an interactive theorem prover with complex proof procedures. We show that the approach of building complex proof procedures out of deciders for (decidable) quantifierfree theories has many advantages: (i) deciders for quantifierfree theories pro ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we address the problem of enriching an interactive theorem prover with complex proof procedures. We show that the approach of building complex proof procedures out of deciders for (decidable) quantifierfree theories has many advantages: (i) deciders for quantifierfree theories
A Proof Procedure for Circumscription
"... In [Siegel and Forget, 1996] a new non monotonic logic namely Xlogics was defined. In this formalism, useful for proof procedure, the nonmonotonic inference relation `X is defined by A `X B if every classical theorem of A [ B which is in X is a theorem of A. We proved that every preferential logic ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
In [Siegel and Forget, 1996] a new non monotonic logic namely Xlogics was defined. In this formalism, useful for proof procedure, the nonmonotonic inference relation `X is defined by A `X B if every classical theorem of A [ B which is in X is a theorem of A. We proved that every preferential logic
Analysis and Transformation of Proof Procedures
, 1994
"... Automated theorem proving has made great progress during the last few decades. Proofs of more and more difficult theorems are being found faster and faster. However, the exponential increase in the size of the search space remains for many theorem proving problems. Logic program analysis and transfo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Automated theorem proving has made great progress during the last few decades. Proofs of more and more difficult theorems are being found faster and faster. However, the exponential increase in the size of the search space remains for many theorem proving problems. Logic program analysis
Synthesis of Proof Procedures for Default Reasoning
"... . We apply logic program development technology to define abstract proof procedures, in the form of logic programs, for computing the admissibility semantics for default reasoning proposed in [2]. The proof procedures are derived from a formal specification. The derivation guarantees the soundness o ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
. We apply logic program development technology to define abstract proof procedures, in the form of logic programs, for computing the admissibility semantics for default reasoning proposed in [2]. The proof procedures are derived from a formal specification. The derivation guarantees the soundness
A Proof Procedure for Adaptive Logics
"... In this paper I present a procedure that generates adaptive proofs for finally derivable adaptive logic consequences. The proof procedure for the inconsistency adaptive logic CLuNr is already presented in [10]. In this paper the procedure for CLuNm is presented and the results for both logics are ge ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper I present a procedure that generates adaptive proofs for finally derivable adaptive logic consequences. The proof procedure for the inconsistency adaptive logic CLuNr is already presented in [10]. In this paper the procedure for CLuNm is presented and the results for both logics
ArgumentationTheoretic Proof Procedures for Logic Programming
, 1997
"... We instantiate the abstract, argumentationbased proof procedure for (credulous) default reasoning proposed in [4, 3] to the normal logic programming case. The proof procedure computes the partial stable model [15]/preferred extension semantics [2] for logic programming. The proof procedure is sound ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We instantiate the abstract, argumentationbased proof procedure for (credulous) default reasoning proposed in [4, 3] to the normal logic programming case. The proof procedure computes the partial stable model [15]/preferred extension semantics [2] for logic programming. The proof procedure
The CIFF Proof Procedure for Abductive Logic Programming with Constraints
 In Proceedings JELIA04
, 2004
"... We introduce a new proof procedure for abductive logic programming and present two soundness results. Our procedure extends that of Fung and Kowalski by integrating abductive reasoning with constraint solving and by relaxing the restrictions on allowed inputs for which the procedure can operate ..."
Abstract

Cited by 43 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We introduce a new proof procedure for abductive logic programming and present two soundness results. Our procedure extends that of Fung and Kowalski by integrating abductive reasoning with constraint solving and by relaxing the restrictions on allowed inputs for which the procedure can operate
The complexity of theoremproving procedures
 IN STOC
, 1971
"... It is shown that any recognition problem solved by a polynomial timebounded nondeterministic Turing machine can be “reduced” to the problem of determining whether a given propositional formula is a tautology. Here “reduced ” means, roughly speaking, that the first problem can be solved deterministi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1050 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
of two given graphs is isomorphic to a subgraph of the second. Other examples are discussed. A method of measuring the complexity of proof procedures for the predicate calculus is introduced and discussed. Throughout this paper, a set of strings 1 means a set of strings on some fixed, large, finite
Results 1  10
of
3,559