Selectively instantiating definitions
When searching for proofs of theorems which contain definitions, it is a significant problem to decide which instances of the definitions to instantiate. We describe a method called dual instantiation, which is a partial solution to the problem in the context of the connection method; the same solution may also be adaptable to other search procedures. Dual instantiation has been implemented in TPS, a theorem prover for classical type theory, and we provide some examples of theorems that have been proven using this method. Dual instantiation has the desirable properties that the search for a proof cannot possibly fail due to insufficient instantiation of definitions, and that the natural deduction proof which results from a successful search will contain no unnecessary instantiations of definitions. Furthermore, the time taken by a proof search using dual instantiation is in general comparable to the time taken by a search in which exactly the required instances of each definition have been instantiated. We also describe how this technique can be applied to the problem of instantiating set variables.
KeywordsTheorem Prove Automate Reasoning Predicate Symbol Automate Deduction Plan Line
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Peter B. Andrews. An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Type Theory: To Truth Through Proof. Academic Press, 1986.Google Scholar
- 7.W. W. Bledsoe. Using Examples to Generate Instantiations of Set Variables. In Proceedings of IJCAI-83, Karlsruhe, Germany, pages 892–901, Aug 8–12, 1983.Google Scholar
- 11.Fausto Giunchiglia and Adolfo Villafiorita. ABSFOL: a Proof Checker with Abstraction. In M.A. McRobbie and J.K. Slaney, editors, CADE-13: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1104, pages 136–140. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
- 12.Fausto Giunchiglia and Toby Walsh. Theorem Proving with Definitions. In Proceedings of AISB 89, Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, 1989.Google Scholar
- 18.Frank Pfenning. Proof Transformations in Higher-Order Logic. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1987. 156 pp.Google Scholar
- 19.D.A. Plaisted. Abstraction Mappings in Mechanical Theorem Proving. In 5th Conference on Automated Deduction, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 87, pages 264–280. Springer-Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
- 21.Dave Plummer. Gazing: Controlling the Use of Rewrite Rules. PhD thesis, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 1987.Google Scholar
- 22.K. Warren. Implementation of a Definition Expansion Mechanism in a Connection Method Theorem Prover. Master's thesis, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Univ. of Edinburgh, 1987.Google Scholar
- 23.Larry Wos. The Problem of Definition Expansion and Contraction. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 3:433–435, 1987.Google Scholar