Abstract
In the field of automated reasoning, the search continues for useful representations of information, for powerful inference rules, for effective canonlcallzatlon procedures, and for intelligent strategies. The practical objective of this search is, of course, to produce ever more powerful automated reasoning programs. In this paper, we show how the power of such programs can be sharply increased by employing inference rules called linked inference rules. In particular, we focus on linked UR-resolutlon, a generalization of standard UR-resolution [2], and discuss ongoing experiments that permit comparison of the two inference rules. The intention is to present the results of those experiments at the Seventh Conference on Automated Deduction. Much of the treatment of linked inference rules given in this paper is from the user’s viewpoint, with certain abstract considerations reserved for Section 3.
This work was supported in part by the Applied Mathematical Sciences Research Program (KC-04-02) of the Office of Energy Research of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38 (Argonne National laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Luckham, D. C., “Some Tree-paring Strategies for Theorem Proving,” Machine Intelligence 3 (ed. Michle, D.), Edinburgh University Press 1968, pp. 95–112.
McCharen, J., Overbeek, R. and Wos, L., “Problems and experiments for and with automated theorem proving programs,” IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. C-25(1976), pp. 773–782.
Robinson, J., “A machlne-orlented logic based on the resolution principle,” J. ACM, Vol. 12(1965), pp. 23–41.
Warren, D. H. D., Implementing Prolog — compiling predicate logic programs, DAI Research Reports 39 & 40, University of Edinburgh, May 1977.
Wojclechowski, W. and Wojcik, A., “Automated design of multlple-valued logic circuits by automatic theorem proving teehnlques,” to appear in IEEE Transactions on Computers.
Wos, L., Carson, D. and Robinson, G., “The unit preference strategy in theorem proving,” Proc. AFIPS 1964 Fall Joint Computer Conference, Vol. 26, Part II, pp. 615–621 (Spartan Books, Washington, D.C.).
Wos, L., Carson, D. and Robinson, G., “Efficiency and completeness of the set of support strategy in theorem proving,” J. ACM, Vol. 12(1965), pp. 536–541.
Wos, L., Smith, B. and Veroff, R., “The Linked Inference Principle, I: The Formal Treatment,” in preparation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1984 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wos, L., Veroff, R., Smith, B., McCune, W. (1984). The Linked Inference Principle, II: The User’s Viewpoint. In: Shostak, R.E. (eds) 7th International Conference on Automated Deduction. CADE 1984. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 170. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34768-4_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34768-4_19
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-96022-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-34768-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive