Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 191–227 | Cite as

A Combined Superposition and Model Evolution Calculus

Article

Abstract

We present a new calculus for first-order theorem proving with equality, \( \mathcal{ME}+\) Sup, which generalizes both the Superposition calculus and the Model Evolution calculus (with equality) by integrating their inference rules and redundancy criteria in a non-trivial way. The main motivation is to combine the advantageous features of these two rather complementary calculi in a single framework. In particular, Model Evolution, as a lifted version of the propositional DPLL procedure, contributes a non-ground splitting rule that effectively permits to split a clause into non variable disjoint subclauses. In the paper we present the calculus in detail. Our main result is its completeness under semantically justified redundancy criteria and simplification rules. We also show how under certain assumptions the model representation computed by a (finite and fair) derivation can be queried in an effective way.

Keywords

Instance based methods Superposition Model evolution Equality 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baumgartner, P.: Logical engineering with instance-based methods. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE-21—The 21st International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4603, pp. 404–409. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bachmair, L., Ganzinger, H.: Chapter 11: Equational reasoning in saturation-based theorem proving. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P.H. (eds.) Automated Deduction. A Basis for Applications. Vol. I: Foundations. Calculi and Refinements, pp. 353–398. Kluwer Academic Publishers (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bachmair, L., Ganzinger, H., Waldmann, U.: Refutational theorem proving for hierarchic first-order theories. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 5(3/4), 193–212 (1994)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baumgartner, P., Tinelli, C.: The model evolution calculus. In: Baader, F. (ed.) CADE-19—The 19th International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2741, pp. 350–364. Springer (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baumgartner, P., Tinelli, C.: The model evolution calculus with equality. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) CADE-20—The 20th International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3632, pp. 392–408. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Comon, H.: Disunification: a survey. In: Lassez, J.-L., Plotkin, G. (eds.) Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of Alan Robinson. MIT Press (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ganzinger, H., Korovin, K.: New directions in instantiation-based theorem proving. In: Proc. 18th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, (LICS’03), pp. 55–64. IEEE Computer Society Press (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ganzinger, H., Korovin, K.: Integrating equational reasoning into instantiation-based theorem proving. In: Computer Science Logic (CSL’04). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3210, pp. 71–84. Springer (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacobs, S., Waldmann, U.: Comparing instance generation methods for automated reasoning. J. Autom. Reason. 38(1–3), 57–78 (2007)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korovin, K.: Iprover—an instantiation-based theorem prover for first-order logic (system description). In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) Automated Reasoning, 4th International Joint Conference, IJCAR 2008, Sydney, Australia, August 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5195, pp. 292–298. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Korovin, K.: Instantiation-based automated reasoning: from theory to practice. In: Schmidt, R.A. (ed.) Automated Deduction—CADE-22, 22nd International Conference on Automated Deduction, Montreal, Canada, August 2–7, 2009. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5663, pp. 163–166. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lynch, C., McGregor, R.E.: Combining instance generation and resolution. In: Ghilardi, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS 2009). LNAI, vol. 5749, pp. 304–318. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nieuwenhuis, R., Rubio, A.: Theorem proving with ordering and equality constrained clauses. J. Symb. Comput. 19, 321–351 (1995)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Plaisted, D.A., Zhu, Y.: Ordered semantic hyper linking. J. Autom. Reason. 25(3), 167–217 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weidenbach, C., Schmidt, R., Hillenbrand, T., Rusev, R., Topic, D.: System description: Spass version 3.0. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE-21—21st International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4603, pp. 514–520. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, T., Sipma, H.B., Manna, Z.: The decidability of the first-order theory of term algebras with Knuth-Bendix order. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) 20th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE’05). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3632, pp. 131–148. Springer (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NICTA and Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.MPI für InformatikSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations