Proof normalization for resolution and paramodulation

  • Leo Bachmair
Regular Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 355)


We prove the refutation completeness of restricted versions of resolution and paramodulation for first-order predicate logic with equality. Furthermore, we show that these inference rules can be combined with various deletion and simplification rules, such as rewriting, without compromising refutation completeness. The techniques employed in the completeness proofs are based on proof normalization and proof orderings.


Normal Form Inference Rule Theorem Prove Atomic Formula Ground Instance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Bachmair, L. 1987. Proof methods for equational theories. Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bachmair, L., Dershowitz, N., and Hsiang, J. 1986. Orderings for equational proofs. In Proc. Symp. Logic in Computer Science, Boston, Massachusetts, 346–357.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Brand, D. 1975. Proving theorems with the modification method. SIAM J. Comput.4:412–430.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Brown, T. 1975. A structured design-method for specialized proof procedures. Ph.D. diss., California Institute of Technology, Pasadena.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Chang, C., and Lee, R. C. 1973. Symbolic logic and mechanical theorem proving. New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Dershowitz, N. 1982. Orderings for term-rewriting systems. Theor. Comput. Sci.17:279–301.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Dershowitz, N. 1987. Termination of rewriting. J. Symbolic Computation3:69–116.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Dershowitz, N., and Manna, Z. 1979. Proving termination with multiset orderings. Commun. ACM22:465–476.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Ganzinger, H. 1988. A completion procedure for conditional equations. To appear in J. Symbolic Computation.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Hsiang, J., and Rusinowitch, M. 1986. A new method for establishing refutational completeness in theorem proving. In Proc. 8th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, ed. J. H. Siekmann, Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., vol. 230, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 141–152.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hsiang, J., and Rusinowitch, M. 1988. Proving refutational completeness of theorem proving strategies, Part I: The transfinite semantic tree method. Submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Joyner, W. 1976. Resolution strategies as decision procedures. J. ACM23:398–417.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Knuth, D., and Bendix, P. 1970. simple word problems in universal algebras. In Computational Problems in Abstract Algebra, ed. J. Leech, Oxford, Pergamon Press, 263–297.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Lankford, D. 1975. Canonical inference. Tech. Rep. ATP-32, Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Peterson, G. 1983. A technique for establishing completeness results in theorem proving with equality. SIAM J. Comput.12:82–100.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Robinson, G., and Wos, L. T. 1969. Paramodulation and theorem proving in first order theories with equality. In Machine Intelligence 4, ed. B. Meltzer and D. Michie, New York, American Elsevier, 133–150.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Robinson, J. A. 1965. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. J. ACM12:23–41.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Rusinowitch, M. 1988. Theorem proving with resolution and superposition: An extension of the Knuth and Bendix procedure as a complete set of inference rules.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Slagle, J. R. 1974. Automated theorem proving for theories with simplifiers, commutativity, and associativity. J. ACM21:622–642.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Wos, L. T., and Robinson, G. 1973. Maximal models and refutation completeness: Semidecision procedures in automatic theorem proving. In Word Problems, ed. W.W. Boone et al., Amsterdam, North-Holland, 609–639.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Wos, L. T., Robinson, G. A., Carson, D. F., and Shalla, L. 1967. The concept of demodulation in theorem proving. J. ACM14:698–709.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Zhang, H., and Kapur, D. 1988. First-order theorem proving using conditional rewrite rules. In Proc. 9th Conf. Automated Deduction, Let. Notes in Comput. Sci. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1–20.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leo Bachmair
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceState University of New York at Stony BrookStony BrookU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations