Advertisement

The role of logic programming in the Fifth Generation Computer Project

  • Kazuhiro Fuchi
  • Koichi Furukawa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 225)

Abstract

This paper describes the role of logic programming in the Fifth Generation Computer Project. We started the project with the conjecture that logic programming is the “bridge” connecting knowledge information processing and parallel computer architecture. Four years have passed since we started the project, and now we can say that this conjecture has been substantially confirmed. The paper gives an overview of the developments which have reinforced this foundational conjecture and how our “bridge” is being realized.

Keywords

Logic Program Logic Programming Inference Engine Partial Evaluation Horn Clause 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Abramson 84]
    Abramson, H., “Definite Clause Translation Grammars,” In Proc. 1984 Int. Symp. on Logic Programming, IEEE Computer Society (1984), 233–240.Google Scholar
  2. [Barwise 83]
    Barwise, J. and Perry, J., Situations and Attitudes, MIT Press (1983).Google Scholar
  3. [Bowen 82]
    Bowen, K. A. and Kowalski, R., “Amalgamating Language and Metalanguage in Logic Programming,” In Logic Programming, K. L. Clark and S.-Å. Tärnlund (eds.), Academic Press (1982), 153–172.Google Scholar
  4. [Bowen 85]
    Bowen, K. A. and Weinberg, T., “A Meta-Level Extension of Prolog,” In Proc. 1985 Symp. on Logic Programming, IEEE Computer Society (1985), 48–53.Google Scholar
  5. [Bundy 79]
    Bundy, A., Byrd, L., Luger, G., Mellish, C., Milne, R. and Palmer, M., “Solving Mechanics Problems Using Meta-Level Inference,” In Proc. 6th IJCAI, Tokyo (1979).Google Scholar
  6. [Bundy 81]
    Bundy, A. and Welham, B., “Using Meta-level Inference for Selective Application of Multiple Rewrite Rules in Algebraic Manipulation,” Artif. Intell. 16 (1981), 189–212.Google Scholar
  7. [Burstall 77]
    Burstall, R. M. and Darlington, J., “A Transformation System for Developing Recursive Programs,” J. ACM 24 (1977), 46–67.Google Scholar
  8. [Carlsson 83]
    Carlsson, M. and Kahn, K. M., LM-Prolog User Manual, Tech. Report 24, UPMAIL, Computer Science Dept., Uppsala Univ. (1983).Google Scholar
  9. [Chikayama 84a]
    Chikayama, T., ESP Reference Manual, Tech. Report TR-044, ICOT (1984).Google Scholar
  10. [Chikayama 84b]
    Chikayama, T., “Unique Features of ESP,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 292–306.Google Scholar
  11. [Clark 77]
    Clark, K. L. and Sickel, S., “Predicate Logic: A Calculus for Deriving Programs,” Proc. 5th IJCAI, Cambridge (1977), 419–420.Google Scholar
  12. [Clark 78]
    Clark, K. L., “Negation as Failure,” In Logic and Data Bases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.), Plenum Press (1978), 293–322.Google Scholar
  13. [Clark 81]
    Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., “A Relational Language for Parallel Programming,” In Proc. 1981 Conf. on Functional Programming Languages and Computer Architecture, ACM (1981), 171–178.Google Scholar
  14. [Clark 82]
    Clark, K. L., McCabe, F. and Gregory, S., “IC-Prolog Language Features,” In Logic Programming, K. L. Clark and S.-Å. Tärnlund (eds.), Academic Press (1982), 253–266.Google Scholar
  15. [Clark 84]
    Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic, Research Report DOC 84/4, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London (1984).Google Scholar
  16. [Codish 85]
    Codish, M., Compiling OR-parallelism into AND-parallelism, Master Thesis, Computer Science, Feinberg Graduate School of the Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot (1985).Google Scholar
  17. [Colmerauer 70]
    Colmerauer, A., Les Systèmes-Q ou un Formalisme pour Analyser er Synthétiser des Phrase sur Ordinateur, Internal Publication 43, Départment d'Informatique, Université de Montreal (1970).Google Scholar
  18. [Colmerauer 78]
    Colmerauer, A., “Metamorphosis Grammars,” In Natural Language Communication with Computers, L. Bolc (ed.), Springer-Verlag (1978).Google Scholar
  19. [Colmerauer 82]
    Colmerauer, A., Prolog II: Reference Manual and Theoretical Model, Internal Report, Groupe Intelligence Artificielle, Université d'Aix-Marseille II (1982).Google Scholar
  20. [Dahl 80]
    Dahl, V., “Two Solutions for the Negation Problem,” In Logic Programming Workshop, S.-Å. Tärnlund (ed.), Debrecen, Hungary (1980).Google Scholar
  21. [Dahl 81]
    Dahl, V., “Translating Spanish into Logic through Logic,” Am. J. Comput. Linguist. 7 (1981), 149–164.Google Scholar
  22. [Dahl 82]
    Dahl, V., “On Database Systems Development through Logic,” ACM Trans. on Database Syst. 7 (1982), 102–123.Google Scholar
  23. [Dahl 84a]
    Dahl, V. and Abramson, H., “On Gapping Grammars,” In Proc. Second Int. Logic Programming Conf., Uppsala Univ. (1984), 77–88.Google Scholar
  24. [Dahl 84b]
    Dahl, V., “More on Gapping Grammars,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 669–677.Google Scholar
  25. [Davis 77]
    Davis, R. and Buchanan, B. G., “Meta-Level Knowledge: Overview and Applications,” In Proc. 5th IJCAI, Cambridge (1977), 920–927.Google Scholar
  26. [Ferrand 85]
    Ferrand, G., Error Diagnosis in Logic Programming: An Adaptation of E. Y. Shapiro's Method, Rapport de Recherche 375, INRIA (1985).Google Scholar
  27. [Futamura 71]
    Futamura, Y., “Partial Evaluation of Computation Process: An Approach to a Compiler-Compiler”, Systems, Computers, Controls 2 (1971), 721–728.Google Scholar
  28. [Gallaire 78]
    Gallaire, H. and Minker, J. (eds.), Logic and Data Bases, Plenum Press (1978).Google Scholar
  29. [Gallaire 81]
    Gallaire, H., Minker, J. and Nicolas, J.-M. (eds.), Advances in Data Base Theory, Vol. 1, Plenum Press (1981).Google Scholar
  30. [Gallaire 84a]
    Gallaire, H., Minker, J. and Nicolas, J.-M. (eds.), Advances in Data Base Theory, Vol. 2, Plenum Press (1984).Google Scholar
  31. [Gallaire 84b]
    Gallaire, H., Minker, J. and Nicolas, J.-M., “Logic and Databases: A Deductive Approach,” Computing Surveys 16 (1984), 153–185.Google Scholar
  32. [Gazdar 82]
    Gazdar, G., “Phrase Structure Grammar,” In The Nature of Syntactic Representation, P. Jacobson and G. K. Pullum (eds.), D. Reidel (1982), 131–186.Google Scholar
  33. [Gazdar 85]
    Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G. and Sag, I., Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Basil Blackwell (1985).Google Scholar
  34. [Goebel 86]
    Goebel, R. and Furukawa, K., “Using Definite Clauses and Integrity Constraints as the Basis for a Theory Formation Approach to Diagnostic Reasoning,” In Proc. Third Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag (1986).Google Scholar
  35. [Hogger 81]
    Hogger, C. J., “Derivation of Logic Programs,” J. ACM 28 (1981), 372–422.Google Scholar
  36. [Kahn 82]
    Kahn, K., A Partial Evaluator of Lisp Written in a Prolog Written in Lisp Intended to be Applied to the Prolog and Itself which in Turn is Intended to be Given to Itself Together with the Prolog to Produce a Prolog Compiler, UPMAIL, Dept. of Computing Science, Uppsala Univ. (1982).Google Scholar
  37. [Kaplan 82]
    Kaplan, R. and Bresnan, J., “Lexical-Functional Grammar: A Formal System for Grammatical Representation,” Chapter 4 of The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, J. Bresnan (ed.), MIT Press (1982), 173–281.Google Scholar
  38. [Kay 84]
    Kay, M., “Unification in Grammar,” In Proc. First Workshop on Natural Language Understanding and Logic Programming, V. Dahl and P. Saint-Dizier (eds.), Rennes, France (1984).Google Scholar
  39. [Komolowski 81]
    Komolowski, H. J., A Specification of Abstract Prolog Machine and Its Application to Partial Evaluation, Linköping Studies in Science and Technology Dissertations, No. 69, Linköping Univ. (1981).Google Scholar
  40. [Kowalski 74]
    Kowalski, R., “Predicate Logic as Programming Language,” In Proc. IFIP '74, North-Holland (1977), 569–574.Google Scholar
  41. [Kowalski 78]
    Kowalski, R. A., “Logic for Data Description,” In Logic and Data Bases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.) Plenum Press, New York (1978), 77–103.Google Scholar
  42. [Kowalski 79]
    Kowalski, R. A., Logic for Problem Solving, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. (1979).Google Scholar
  43. [Kowalski 81]
    Kowalski, R. A., “Logic as a Data Base Language,” In Proc. Advanced Seminar on Theoretical Issues in Data Bases, Cetraro, Italy (1981).Google Scholar
  44. [Kowalski 82]
    Kowalski, R., “Logic Programming in the Fifth Generation,” In Proc. Fifth Generation Conf., SPL International, London (1982).Google Scholar
  45. [Kursawe 86]
    Kursawe, P., “How to Invent a Prolog Machine,” In Proc. Third Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag (1986).Google Scholar
  46. [Lloyd 84]
    Lloyd, J. L. and Topor, R. W., “Making PROLOG More Expressive,” J. Logic Programming 1 (1984), 225–240.Google Scholar
  47. [Lloyd 85a]
    Lloyd, J. L. and Topor, R. W., “A Basis for Deductive Database Systems,” J. Logic Programming 2 (1985), 93–109.Google Scholar
  48. [Lloyd 85b]
    Lloyd, J. L. and Topor, R. W., A Basis for Deductive Database Systems II, Tech. Report 85/6, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1985).Google Scholar
  49. [Lloyd 86a]
    Lloyd, J. W., Declarative Error Diagnosis, Tech. Report 86/3, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1986).Google Scholar
  50. [Lloyd 86b]
    Lloyd, J. and Takeuchi, A., A Framework for Debugging GHC, to appear as ICOT Tech. Report (1986).Google Scholar
  51. [Matsumoto 83]
    Matsumoto, Y., Tanaka, H., Hirakawa, H., Miyoshi H. and Yasukawa, H., “BUP: A Bottom-Up Parser Embedded in Prolog,” New Generation Computing 1 (1983), 145–158.Google Scholar
  52. [McCord 82]
    McCord, M. C., “Using Slots and Modifiers in Logic Grammars for Natural Language,” Artif. Intell. 18 (1982), 327–367.Google Scholar
  53. [McCord 85]
    McCord, M. C., “Modular Logic Grammars,” In Proc. 23rd Annual Meeting of ACL (1985), 104–117.Google Scholar
  54. [Mierowsky 85]
    Mierowsky, C., Taylor, S., Shapiro, E., Levy, J. and Safra, M., The Design and Implementation of Flat Concurrent Prolog, Tech. Report CS85-09, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot (1985).Google Scholar
  55. [Miyachi 84]
    Miyachi, T., Kunifuji, S., Kitakami, H., Furukawa, K., Takeuchi, A. and Yokota, H., “A Knowledge Assimilation Method for Logic Databases,” In Proc. 1984 Int. Symp. on Logic Programming, IEEE Computer Society (1984), 118–130.Google Scholar
  56. [Morishita 84]
    Morishita, T. and Hirakawa H., GDL0: A Grammar Description Language Based on DCG, Tech. Memorandum TM-0084, ICOT (1984).Google Scholar
  57. [Mukai 85]
    Mukai, K. and Yasukawa, H., “Complex Indeterminates in Prolog and Its Application to Discourse Models,” New Generation Computing 3 (1985), 441–466.Google Scholar
  58. [Naish 83]
    Naish, L. and Thom, J. A., The MU-PROLOG Deductive Database, Tech. Report 83/10, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1985).Google Scholar
  59. [Naish 85a]
    Naish, L., MU-PROLOG 3.2 Reference Manual, Tech. Report 85/11, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1985).Google Scholar
  60. [Naish 85b]
    Naish, L., Negation and Quantifiers in NU-PROLOG, Tech. Report 85/13, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1985).Google Scholar
  61. [Naish 85c]
    Naish, L., Negation and Control in Prolog, Tech. Report 85/12, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Melbourne (1985).Google Scholar
  62. [Nicolas 78]
    Nicolas, J.-M., and Gallaire, H., “Database: Theory vs. Interpretation,” In Logic and Data Bases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.) Plenum Press (1978), 33–54.Google Scholar
  63. [Pereira 78]
    Pereira, L. M., Pereira, F. C. N. and Warren, D. H. D., User's Guide to Decsystem-10 Prolog, Occasional Paper No. 15, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Univ. of Edinburgh (1978).Google Scholar
  64. [Pereira 80]
    Pereira, F. C. N. and Warren, D. H. D., “Definite Clause Grammars—A Survey of the Formalism and a Comparison with Augmented Transition Networks,” Artif. Intell. 13 (1980), 231–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. [Pereira 81]
    Pereira, F., “Extraposition Grammars,” Am. J. Comput. Linguist. 7 (1981), 243–256.Google Scholar
  66. [Pereira 83]
    Pereira, F. and Warren, D. H. D., Parsing as Deduction, SRI Tech. Note 295 (1983). Also in Proc. 21st Annual Meeting of ACL (1983), 137–144.Google Scholar
  67. [Pereira 86]
    Pereira, L. M., “Rational Debugging in Logic Programming,” In Proc. Third Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag (1986).Google Scholar
  68. [Pollard 84]
    Pollard, C. J., Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars, Head Grammars, and Natural Languages, Ph. D. Dissertation, Stanford Univ. (1984).Google Scholar
  69. [Porto 82]
    Porto, A., “EPILOG: A Language for Extended Programming in Logic” In Proc. First Int. Logic Programming Conf. (1982), 31–37.Google Scholar
  70. [Reiter 78]
    Reiter, R., “On Closed World Database,” In Logic and Data Bases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.) Plenum Press (1978), 56–76.Google Scholar
  71. [Reiter 84]
    Reiter, R., “Towards a Logical Representation of Relational Database Theory,” In On Conceptual Modeling, M. Brodie, J. Mylopoulos and J. W. Schmidt (eds.) Springer-Verlag (1985).Google Scholar
  72. [Robinson 65]
    Robinson, J. A., “A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on Resolution Principle,” J. ACM 12 (1965), 23–41.Google Scholar
  73. [Roussel 75]
    Roussel, P., Prolog: Manual de Reference et d'Utilisation, Groupe d'Intelligence Artificielle, Marseille-Luminy.Google Scholar
  74. [Sabatier 84]
    Sabatier, P., “Puzzle Grammars,” In Proc. First Workshop on Natural Language Understanding and Logic Programming, V. Dahl and P. Saint-Dizier (eds.), Rennes, France (1984).Google Scholar
  75. [Shapiro 83a]
    Shapiro, E. Y., A Subset of Concurrent Prolog and Its Interpreter. Tech. Report TR-003, ICOT (1983).Google Scholar
  76. [Shapiro 83b]
    Shapiro, E. Y., Algorithmic Program Debugging, MIT Press (1983).Google Scholar
  77. [Shieber 83]
    Shieber, S. M., Uszkoreit, H., Pereira, F. C. N., Robinson, J. J. and Tyson, M., “The Formalism and Implementation of PATR-II”, In Research on Interactive Acquisition and Use of Knowledge, Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, California (1983).Google Scholar
  78. [Shieber 85]
    Shieber, S. M., “An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar,” In Proc. 23rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (1985).Google Scholar
  79. [Takagi 84]
    Takagi, S., Yokoi, T., Uchida, S., Kurokawa, T., Hattori, T., Chikayama, T., Sakai, K. and Tsuji, J., “Overall Design of SIMPOS,” In Proc. Second Int. Logic Programming Conf., Uppsala Univ. (1984), 1–12.Google Scholar
  80. [Takeuchi 85]
    Takeuchi, A. and Furukawa, K., Partial Evaluation of Prolog Programs and Its Application to Meta Programming, ICOT Tech. Report TR-126 (1985). Also to appear in Proc. IFIP '86 (1986).Google Scholar
  81. [Takeuchi 86]
    Takeuchi, A., Algorithmic Debugging of GHC programs, to appear as ICOT Tech. Report (1986).Google Scholar
  82. [Takewaki 85]
    Takewaki, T., Takeuchi, A., Kunifuji, S. and Furukawa, K., Application of Partial Evaluation to the Algebraic Manipulation System and its Evaluation, Tech. Report TR-148, ICOT (1985).Google Scholar
  83. [Taki 84]
    Taki, K., Yokota, M., Yamamoto, A., Nishikawa, H., Uchida, S., Nakashima, H. and Mitsuishi, A., “Hardware Design and Implementation of the Personal Sequential Inference Machine (PSI),” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 398–409.Google Scholar
  84. [Taki 86]
    Taki, K., Kimura, Y., Yokota, M., Chikayama, T. and Uchida, S., “The Overview of Multi-PSI System,” In Proc. 32nd Annual Convention IPS Japan (1986), 5Q-8 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  85. [Tamaki 84]
    Tamaki, H. and Sato, T., “Unfold/Fold Transformation of Logic Programs,” In Second Int. Logic Programming Conf., Uppsala Univ. (1984), 127–138.Google Scholar
  86. [Tärnlund 77]
    Tärnlund, S.-Å., “Horn Clause Computability,” BIT 17 (1977), 215–226.Google Scholar
  87. [Uchida 84]
    Uchida, S. and Yokoi, T., “Sequential Inference Machine: SIM-Progress Report,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 58–69.Google Scholar
  88. [Ueda 85]
    Ueda, K., Guarded Horn Clauses, Tech. Report TR-103, ICOT (1985). Also to appear in Logic Programming '85, E. Wada (ed.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 221, Springer-Verlag (1986).Google Scholar
  89. [Ueda 86]
    Ueda, K., “Making Exhaustive Search Programs Deterministic,” In Proc. Third Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag (1986).Google Scholar
  90. [Warren 77]
    Warren, D. H., Implementing PROLOG—Compiling Predicate Logic Programs, Vol. 1–2, D. A. I. Research Report No. 39, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Univ. of Edinburgh (1977).Google Scholar
  91. [Warren 81]
    Warren, D. H. D. and Pereira, F. C. N., An Efficient Easily Adaptable System for Interpreting Natural Language Queries, D. A. I. Research Paper No. 155, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, Univ. of Edinburgh (1981).Google Scholar
  92. [Warren 83]
    Warren D. H. D., An Abstract Prolog Instruction Set, Tech. Note 309, Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International (1983).Google Scholar
  93. [Woods 70]
    Woods, W. A., “Transition Network Grammars for Natural Language Analysis,” Comm. ACM 13 (1970), 591–606.Google Scholar
  94. [Yasukawa 85]
    Yasukawa, H., Hirakawa, H., Mukai, K., Miyoshi, H. and Tanaka, Y., The Outline of Discourse Understanding System DUALS, Tech. Memorandum TM-0118, ICOT (1985) (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  95. [Yokoi 84]
    Yokoi, T., Uchida, S. and ICOT Third Lab., “Sequential Inference Machine: SIM—Its Programming and Operating System,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 70–81.Google Scholar
  96. [Yokota 84]
    Yokota, M., Yamamoto, A., Taki, K., Nishikawa, H., Uchida, S., Nakajima, K. and Mitsui, M., “A Microprogrammed Interpreter for the Personal Sequential Inference Machine,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1984, ICOT (1984), 410–418.Google Scholar
  97. [Yokota 86]
    Yokota, H., Sakai, K. and Itoh, H., “Deductive Database System Based on Unit Resolution,” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, IEEE Computer Society (1986), 228–235.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazuhiro Fuchi
    • 1
  • Koichi Furukawa
    • 1
  1. 1.ICOT Research Center Institute for New Generation Computer TechnologyTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations