Analysis of Distributed-Search Contraction-Based Strategies
We present a model of parallel search in theorem proving for forward-reasoning strategies, with contraction and distributed search. We extend to parallel search the bounded-search-spaces approach to the measurement of infinite search spaces, capturing both the advantages of parallelization, e.g., the subdivision of work, and its disadvantages, e.g., the cost of communication, in terms of search space. These tools are applied to compare the search space of a distributed-search contraction-based strategy with that of the corresponding sequential strategy.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.S. Anantharaman and M. P. Bonacina. An application of automated equational reasoning to many-valued logic. In M. Okada and S. Kaplan, editors, CTRS-90, volume 516 of LNCS, pages 156–161. Springer Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
- 3.L. Bachmair and H. Ganzinger. Non-clausal resolution and superposition with selection and redundancy criteria. In A. Voronkov, editor, LPAR-92, volume 624 of LNAI, pages 273–284. Springer Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- 4.L. Bachmair and H. Ganzinger. A theory of resolution. Technical Report MPI-I-97-2-005, Max Planck Institut für Informatik, 1997.Google Scholar
- 6.M. P. Bonacina. Experiments with subdivision of search in distributed theorem proving. In M. Hitz and E. Kaltofen, editors, PASCO-97, pages 88–100. ACM Press, 1997.Google Scholar
- 7.M. P. Bonacina. Distributed contraction-based strategies: model and analysis. Technical Report 98-02, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Iowa, 1998.Google Scholar
- 10.M. P. Bonacina and J. Hsiang. On the modelling of search in theorem proving — Towards a theory of strategy analysis. Information and Computation, forthcoming, 1998.Google Scholar
- 13.N. Dershowitz and J.-P. Jouannaud. Rewrite systems. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, volume B, pages 243–320. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
- 14.D. Kapur and H. Zhang. An overview of RRL: rewrite rule laboratory. In N. Dershowitz, editor, 3rd RTA, volume 355 of LNCS, pages 513–529. Springer Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
- 15.C. Kirchner, C. Lynch, and C. Scharff. Fine-grained concurrent completion. In H. Ganzinger, editor, 7th RTA, volume 1103 of LNCS, pages 3–17. Springer Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
- 17.W. McCune. Otter 3.0 reference manual and guide. Technical Report 94/6, MCS Div., Argonne Nat. Lab., 1994.Google Scholar
- 19.D. A. Plaisted. Equational reasoning and term rewriting systems. In D. Gabbay and J. Siekmann, editors, Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, pages 273–364. Oxford University Press, New York, 1993.Google Scholar
- 20.D. A. Plaisted and Y. Zhu. The Efficiency of Theorem Proving Strategies. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohns, 1997.Google Scholar
- 21.C. B. Suttner and J. Schumann. Parallel automated theorem proving. In L. Kanal, V. Kumar, H. Kitano, and C. B. Suttner, editors, Parallel Processing for Artificial Intelligence. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1994.Google Scholar