# On the word, subsumption, and complement problem for recurrent term schematizations

## Abstract

We investigate the word and the subsumption problem for recurrent term schematizations, which are a special type of constraints based on iteration. By means of unification, we reduce these problems to a fragment of Presburger arithmetic. Our approach is applicable to all recurrent term schematizations having a finitary unification algorithm. Furthermore, we study a particular form of the complement problem. Given a finite set of terms, we ask whether its complement can be finitely represented by schematizations, using only the equality predicate without negation. The answer is negative as there are ground terms too complex to be represented by schematizations with limited resources.

## Keywords

Word Problem Unification Algorithm Counter Variable Quantifier Elimination Complement Problem## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- [AHL97]A. Amaniss, M. Hermann, and D. Lugiez. Set operations for recurrent term schematizations. In M. Bidoit and M. Dauchet, editors,
*Proc. 7th TAPSOFT Conference*,*Lille (France)*, LNCS 1214, pages 333–344. Springer, 1997.Google Scholar - [CH95]H. Chen and J. Hsiang. Recurrence domains: Their unification and application to logic programming.
*Information and Computation*, 122:45–69, 1995.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Com95]H. Comon. On unification of terms with integer exponents.
*Mathematical Systems Theory*, 28(1):67–88, 1995.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Coo72]D.C. Cooper. Theorem proving in arithmetic without multiplication. In B. Meltzer and D. Mitchie, editors,
*Machine Intelligence*, volume 7, pages 91–99. Edinburgh University Press, 1972.Google Scholar - [GJ79]M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson.
*Computers and intractability: A guide to the theory of NP-completeness*. W.H. Freeman and Co, 1979.Google Scholar - [Grä88]E. Grädel. Subclasses of Preburger arithmetic and the polynomial-time hierarchy.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 56(3):289–301, 1988.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [HG97]M. Hermann and R. Galbavý. Unification of infinite sets of terms schematized by primal grammars.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 176(1–2):111–158, 1997.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [LM87]J.-L. Lassez and K. Marriott. Explicit representation of terms defined by counter examples.
*J. Automated Reasoning*, 3(3):301–317, 1987.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Pel97]N. Peltier. Increasing model building capabilities by constraint solving on terms with integer exponents.
*J. Symbolic Computation*, 24(1):59–101, 1997.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Sal91]G. Salzer. Deductive generalization and meta-reasoning, or how to formalize Genesis. In
*österreichische Tagung für Künstliche Intelligenz, Informatik-Fachberichte*287, pages 103–115. Springer, 1991.Google Scholar - [Sal92]G. Salzer. The unification of infinite sets of terms and its applications. In A. Voronkov, editor,
*Proc. 3rd LPAR Conference*,*St. Petersburg (Russia)*, LNCS (LNAI) 624, pages 409–420. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar - [Sal94]G. Salzer. Primal grammars and unification modulo a binary clause. In A. Bundy, editor,
*Proc. 12th CADE Conference*,*Nancy (France)*, LNCS (LNAI) 814, pages 282–295. Springer, 1994.Google Scholar - [Sch97]U. Schöning. Complexity of Presburger arithmetic with fixed quantifier dimension.
*Theory of Computing Systems*, 30(4):423–428, 1997.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar