A prolog technology theorem prover: Implementation by an extended prolog compiler
 Mark E. Stickel
 … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discount
Rent now* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Get AccessAbstract
A Prolog technology theorem prover (PTTP) is an extension of Prolog that is complete for the full firstorder predicate calculus. It differs from Prolog in its use of unification with the occurs check for soundness, the modelelimination reduction rule that is added to Prolog inferences to make the inference system complete, and depthfirst iterativedeepening search instead of unbounded depthfirst search to make the search strategy complete. A Prolog technology theorem prover has been implemented by an extended PrologtoLISP compiler that supports these additional features. It is capable of proving theorems in the full firstorder predicate calculus at a rate of thousands of inferences per second.
 Andrews, P. B. (1981) Theorem proving via general matings. Journal of the ACM 28: pp. 193214
 Antoniou, G. and Ohlbach, H. J., ‘TERMINATOR’. Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Karlsruhe, West Germany (August 1983) 916–919.
 Bayerl, S., Kurfess, F., Letz, R., and Schumann, J., ‘PROTHEO/2: sequential PROLOGlike theorem prover based on the connection method’ (1986).
 Bibel, W. (1982) Automated Theorem Proving. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, West Germany
 Butler, R., Lusk, E., McCune, W., and Overbeek, R., ‘Paths to highperformance automated theorem proving’. Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Automated Deduction, Oxford, England (July 1986) 588–597.
 Boyer, R. S., Moore, J. S. The sharing of structure in theoremproving programs. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. eds. (1972) Machine Intelligence 7. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, Scotland
 Bürckert, H. J., Wang, H., Zheng, R. (1983) MKRP: a performance test by working mathematicians. Institut für Informatik I, Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, West Germany
 Chang, C. L., Lee, R. C. T. (1973) Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, New York, New York
 Cohen, J. (1985) Describing Prolog by its interpretation and compilation. Communications of the ACM 28: pp. 13111324
 Colmerauer, A. Prolog and infinite trees. In: Clark, K. L., Tarnlund, S. A. eds. (1982) Logic Programming. Academic Press, New York, New York
 Eder, G. (1976) A PROLOGlike interpreter for nonHorn clauses. Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland
 Fleisig, S., Loveland, D., Smiley, A. K., Yarmush, D. L. (1974) An implementation of the model climination proof procedure. Journal of the ACM 21: pp. 124139
 Korf, R. E. (1985) Depthfirst iterativedeepening: an optimal admissible tree search. Artificial Intelligence 27: pp. 97109
 Kowalski, R., Kuehner, D. (1971) Linear resolution with selection function. Artificial Intelligence 2: pp. 227260
 Lawrence, J. D., Starkey, J. D. (1974) Experimental tests of resolution based theoremproving strategies. Computer Science Department, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington
 Loveland, D. W. (1969) A simplified format for the model elimination procedure. Journal of the ACM 16: pp. 349363
 Loveland, D. W. (1978) Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis. NorthHolland, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
 Loveland, D. W., ‘Automated theorem proving: mapping logic into AI’ Proceedings of the International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, Knoxville, Tennessee (October 1986) 214–229.
 Loveland, D. W., ‘NearHorn Prolog’. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Logic Programming, Melbourne, Australia (May 1987) 456–469.
 Loveland, D. W., Stickel, M. E. (1976) The hole in goal trees: some guidance from resolution theory. IEEE Transactions on Computers C 25: pp. 335341
 Lusk, E. L., McCune, W. W., and Overbeek, R. A., Logic Machine Architecture: kernel functions’. Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Automated Deduction, New York, New York (June 1982) 70–84.
 Lusk, E. L., McCune, W. W., and Overbeek, R. A., ‘Logic Machine Architecture: inference mechanisms’. Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Automated Deduction, New York, New York (June 1982) 85–108.
 Lusk, E. L. and Overbeek, R. A., ‘A portable environment for research in automated reasoning’. Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Automated Deduction, Napa, California (May 1984) 43–52.
 Malachi, Y., Nonclausal Logic Programming. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, March 1986.
 Michie, D., Ross, R., Shannan, G. J. Gdeduction. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. eds. (1972) Machine Intelligence 7. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, pp. 141165
 Nilsson, N. J. (1980) Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Tioga Publishing Co., Palo Alto, California
 Plaised, D. A. (1982) A simplified problem reduction format. Artificial Intelligence 18: pp. 227261
 Plaisted, D. A., ‘NonHorn clause logic programming without contrapositives’ (1987).
 Rao, V. N., Kumar, V., and Ramesh, K., ‘A parallel implementation of iterativedeepening A^{*}’. Proceedings of the AAAI87 National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, Washington (July 1987) 178–181.
 Raph, Karl Mark G. (1984) The Markgraf Karl Refutation Procedure. Fachbereich Informatik, Universität Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, West Germany
 Reboh, R., Raphael, B., Yates, R. A., Kling, R. E., Verlarde, C. (1972) Study of automatic theoremproving programs. Artificial Intelligence Center, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California
 Shostak, R. E. (1976) Refutation graphs. Artificial Intelligence 7: pp. 5164
 Slate, D. J., Atkin, L. R. CHESS 4.5 — The Northwestern University chess program. In: Frey, P. W. eds. (1977) Chess Skill in Man and Machine. SpringerVerlag, New York, New York, pp. 82118
 Stickel, M. E. (1984) A Prolog technology theorem prover. New Generation Computing 2: pp. 371383
 Stickel, M. E. and Tyson, W. M., ‘An analysis of consecutively bounded depthfirst search with applications in automated deduction’. Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, California (August 1985) 1073–1075.
 Umrigar, Z. D. and Pitchumani, V., ‘An experiment in programming with full firstorder logic’. Proceedings of the 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming, Boston, Massachusetts (July 1985) 40–47.
 Warren, D. H. D. (1983) An abstract Prolog instruction set. Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, Menlo Park, California
 Wilkins, D. E., ‘QUEST: a nonclausal theorem proving system’. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Essex, Essex, England, 1973.
 Wilson, G. A., Minker, J. (1976) Resolution, refinements, and search strategies: a comparative study. IEEE Transactions on Computers C 25: pp. 782801
 Wos, L., Veroff, R., Smith, B., and McCune, W., ‘The linked inference principle, II: the user's viewpoint’. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Napa, California (May 1984) 316–332.
 Wos, L. T., Unpublished notes, Argonne National Laboratory (about 1965).
 Title
 A prolog technology theorem prover: Implementation by an extended prolog compiler
 Journal

Journal of Automated Reasoning
Volume 4, Issue 4 , pp 353380
 Cover Date
 19881201
 DOI
 10.1007/BF00297245
 Print ISSN
 01687433
 Online ISSN
 15730670
 Publisher
 Kluwer Academic Publishers
 Additional Links
 Topics
 Keywords

 Automated theorem proving
 model elimination procedure
 Prolog
 Industry Sectors
 Authors

 Mark E. Stickel ^{(1)}
 Author Affiliations

 1. Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, 94025, Menlo Park, California, U.S.A.