Coinductive Constraint Logic Programming

  • Neda Saeedloei
  • Gopal Gupta
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7294)


Constraint logic programming (CLP) has been proposed as a declarative paradigm for merging constraint solving and logic programming. Recently, coinductive logic programming has been proposed as a powerful extension of logic programming for handling (rational) infinite objects and reasoning about their properties. Coinductive logic programming does not include constraints while CLP’s declarative semantics is given in terms of a least fixed-point (i.e., it is inductive) and cannot directly support reasoning about (rational) infinite objects and their properties. In this paper we combine constraint logic programming and coinduction to obtain co-constraint logic programming (co-CLP for brevity). We present the declarative semantics of co-CLP in terms of a greatest fixed-point and its operational semantics based on the coinductive hypothesis rule. We prove the equivalence of these two semantics for programs with rational terms.


Logic Program Logic Programming Function Symbol Operational Semantic Constraint Logic 
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.
    Barwise, J., Moss, L.: Vicious circles: on the mathematics of non-wellfounded phenomena. CSLI, Stanford (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Colmerauer, A.: Prolog and infinite trees. In: Clark, K.L., Tärnlund, S.-A. (eds.) Logic Programming, pp. 231–251. Academic Press, London (1982)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gupta, G., Saeedloei, N., DeVries, B., Min, R., Marple, K., Kluźniak, F.: Infinite Computation, Co-induction and Computational Logic. In: Corradini, A., Klin, B., Cîrstea, C. (eds.) CALCO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6859, pp. 40–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gupta, R.: Programming models and methods for spatiotemporal actions and reasoning in cyber-physical systems. In: NSF Workshop on CPS (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heitmeyer, C.L., Lynch, N.A.: The generalized railroad crossing: A case study in formal verification of real-time systems. In: IEEE RTSS, pp. 120–131 (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Henzinger, T.A., Ho, P.-H.: Hytech: The Cornell Hybrid Technology Tool. In: Antsaklis, P.J., Kohn, W., Nerode, A., Sastry, S.S. (eds.) HS 1994. LNCS, vol. 999, pp. 265–293. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jaffar, J., Maher, M.J.: Constraint logic programming: A survey. J. Log. Program. 19/20, 503–581 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, E.A.: Cyber-physical systems: Design challenges. In: ISORC (May 2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of logic programming, 2nd extended edn. Springer, Berlin (1987)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saeedloei, N.: Modeling and Verification of Real-Time and Cyber-Physical Systems. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saeedloei, N., Gupta, G.: Verifying Complex Continuous Real-Time Systems with Coinductive CLP(R). In: Dediu, A.-H., Fernau, H., Martín-Vide, C. (eds.) LATA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6031, pp. 536–548. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saeedloei, N., Gupta, G.: A logic-based modeling and verification of CPS. SIGBED Rev. 8, 31–34 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Simon, L.: Coinductive Logic Programming. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simon, L., Bansal, A., Mallya, A., Gupta, G.: Co-Logic Programming: Extending Logic Programming with Coinduction. In: Arge, L., Cachin, C., Jurdziński, T., Tarlecki, A. (eds.) ICALP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4596, pp. 472–483. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sterling, L., Shapiro, E.: The art of Prolog: advanced programming techniques, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Neda Saeedloei
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gopal Gupta
    • 2
  1. 1.INRIA Paris-RocquencourtFrance
  2. 2.University of Texas at DallasUSA

Personalised recommendations