Data structures and control architecture for implementation of theorem-proving programs

  • Ross A. Overbeek
  • Ewing L. Lusk
Thursday Afternoon
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 87)


This paper presents the major design features of a new theorem-proving system currently being implemented. In it the authors describe the data structures of an existing program with which much experience has been obtained and discuss their significance for major theorem-proving algorithms such as subsumption, demodulation, resolution, and paramodulation. A new architecture for the large-scale design of theorem proving programs, which provides flexible tools for experimentation, is also presented.


Theorem Prove Function Symbol Input Port Variable Node Internal Format 
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.
    E. Lusk and R. Overbeek, Experiments with Resolution-Based Theorem-Proving Algorithms, Comp. Math. with Appls, to appear.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Lusk, and R. Overbeek, Experiments with Resolution-Based Theorem-Proving Algorithms (extend abstract), Third Workshop on Automated Deduction, Boston, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. D. McCharen, R. A. Overbeek, and L. Wos, Complexity and related enhancements for automated theorem proving programs, Comp. Maths. with Appls., 2, 1–16 (1976).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. D. McCharen, R. A. Overbeek, and L. Wos, Problems and Experiments for and with automated theorem-proving programs, IEEE Trans. on Computers, C-25, No. 8, 773–782, (1976).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. A. Overbeek, A New class of automated theorem-proving algorithms, JACM, 21, 191–200 (1974).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. A. Overbeek, An implementation of hyper-resolution, Comp. Maths. with Appls., 1, 201–214 (1975).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. A. Robinson, Mechanizing higher-order logic, Mach. Intelligence 4, Amer. Elsevier Pub. Co., Inc., 151–170 (1969).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Winker and L. Wos, Automated Generation of Models and Computer Examples and its Application to Open Questions in Ternary Boolean Algebra, Proc. Eighth Int. Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic, pp. 251–256. Rosemont, Illinois (1978); IEEE (1978)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Winker, L. Wos, and E. Lusk, Semigroups, involutions, and antiantomorphisms: a computer solution to an open question, in preparation.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Winker, Generation and verification of finite models and counterexamples using an automated theorem prover, answering two open questions, Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Automated Deduction, Austin, 1979.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Wos, S. Winker, and L. Henschen, Hyperparamodulation: a refinement of paramodulation, in preparation.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. Wojcieckowski and A. Wojcik, Multiple-valued logic design by theorem proving, Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic, Bathe, England, May 1979.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ross A. Overbeek
    • 1
  • Ewing L. Lusk
    • 1
  1. 1.Northern Illinois UniversityDeKalbUSA

Personalised recommendations