Advertisement

XBarnacle: Making theorem provers more accessible

  • Helen Lowe
  • David Duncan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1249)

Abstract

XBarnacle provides:
  1. 1.

    An extension to the capabilities of CLAM, as not all theorems may be proved automatically, even with the provision of lemmas.

     
  2. 2.

    A more useable version of CLAM, with potential to extend its user base.

     
  3. 3.

    A tool for experimenting with different methods and heuristics.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R.S. Boyer and J.S. Moore (1979). A Computational Logic. Academic Press, ACM monograph series.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Bundy (1988). The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In R. Lusk and R. Overbeek (eds.), 9th Conference on automated Deduction, pages 111–120. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, C. Horn, and A. Smaill (1990). The Oyster-CLAM system. In M.E. Stickel (ed.), 10th Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 647–648. Springer-Verlag. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 449.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, J. Hesketh, A. Smaill, and A. Stevens (1992). A rational reconstruction and extension of recursion analysis. In Sridharan, N. S. (ed.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 359–365. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Ireland and A. Bundy, (1994). Productive use of failure in inductive proof. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 16.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.A. Norman (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Lowe
    • 1
  • David Duncan
    • 1
  1. 1.Napier UniversityEdinburgh

Personalised recommendations