SETHEO goes software engineering: Application of ATP to software reuse

  • Bernd Fischer
  • Johann M. Ph. Schumann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1249)


The results of our experiments with SETHEO are very encouraging. Nevertheless, many improvements on this approach have to be made before this tool can really be used in industry. Due to the hard time-constraints (“results while-u-wait”), the reduction of proof-tasks, both in complexity and number is of central importance. A powerful chain of filters (ranging from signature matching to dis-proving techniques) must ensure that only a few proof tasks remain to be processed by the automated theorem prover. For these, a set of axioms as small as possible and valuable lemmas must be selected. Furthermore, work will be done to improve the approximation of induction.

This application of automated theorem proving technique carries the unique feature that soundness and completeness are not absolutely vital — unsound and incomplete methods only reduce the precision and recall of the retrieval tool. This allows interesting and promising techniques of approximating proofs (e.g., by filter chains or iteration) to be explored which will help to lead to an industrial application of SETHEO.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    P. Baumgartner and U. Furbach. PROTEIN: A PROver with a Theory Extension Interface. In Proc. 13th Conf. Automated Deduction. Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. C. Bicarregui, J. S. Fitzgerald, P. A. Lindsay, R. Moore, and B. Ritchie. Proof in VDM: A Practitioner's Guide. Springer, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    B. Fischer. A systematic approach to type-based software component retrieval. PhD thesis, TU Braunschweig (in preparation).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Letz, J. Schumann, S. Bayerl, and W. Bibel. SETHEO: A High-Performance Theorem Prover. J. Automated Reasoning, 8(2):183–212, 1992.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    P. Manhart and S. Meggendorfer. A knowledge and deduction based software retrieval tool. In Proc. 4th Intl. Symp. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 29–36, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Moser et. al. The Model Elimination Provers SETHEO and E-SETHEO. Special issue of J. Automated Reasoning, to appear 1997.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E. J. Rollins and J. M. Wing. Specifications as search keys for software libraries. Proc. 8th Intl. Conf. Symp. Logic Programming, pp. 173–187. MIT Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. Schumann. SiCoTHEO: Simple Competitive parallel Theorem Provers (System Abstract). In Proc. 13th Conf. Automated Deduction. Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Zand and M. Samadzadeh. Software reuse: Current status and trends. J. Systems Software, 30(3):167–170, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernd Fischer
    • 1
  • Johann M. Ph. Schumann
    • 2
  1. 1.Abt. SoftwaretechnologieTU BraunschweigBraunschweig
  2. 2.Institut für InformatikTU MünchenMünchen

Personalised recommendations