OR-parallel theorem proving with random competition

  • Wolfgang Ertel
Session 9: Parallel Theorem Proving and Logic Programming
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 624)


With random competition we propose a method for parallelizing arbitrary theorem provers. We can prove high efficiency (compared with other parallel theorem provers) of random competition on highly parallel architectures with thousands of processors. This method is suited for all kinds of distributed memory architectures, particularly for large networks of high performance workstations since no communication between the processors is necessary during run-time. On a set of examples we show the performance of random competition applied to the model elimination theorem prover SETHEO.

Besides the speedup results for random competition our theoretical analysis gives fruitful insight in the interrelation between search-tree structure, run-time distribution and parallel performance of OR-parallel search in general.


OR-parallelism random search random competition speedup theorem proving SETHEO model elimination 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Ali87]
    K. A. M. Ali. Or-parallel execution of PROLOG on a multi-sequential machine. Int. Journal of Parallel Programming, 15(3):189–214, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Ert92]
    W. Ertel. Random Competition: A Simple, but Efficient Method for Parallelizing Inference Systems. In B. Fronhöfer and G. Wrightson, editors, Parallelization in Inference Systems. LNAI 590, Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. [FK87]
    B. Fronhöfer and F. Kurfeß. Cooperative Competition: A Modest Proposal Concerning the Use of Multi-Processor Systems for Automated Reasoning. Technical Report ATP-74-VTI-87, Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität München, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [JAM87]
    V. K. Janakiram, D. P. Agrawal, and R. Mehrotra. Randomized Parallel Algorithms for Prolog Programs and Backtracking Applications. In Int. Conf. on Parallel Processing, pages 278–281, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [KR90]
    V. Kumar and V. N. Rao. Scalable Parallel Formulations of Depth-First Search. In Vipin Kumar, P.S. Gopalakrishnan, and Laveen N. Kanal, editors, Parallel Algorithmus for Maschine Intelligence and Vision, pages 1–41. Springer Verlag, New York, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. [LSBB92]
    R. Letz, J. Schumann, S. Bayerl, and W. Bibel. SETHEO, A High-Performance Theorem Prover. to appear in Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1992. available as Technical Report TUM-I9008 from Technical University Munich.Google Scholar
  7. [Pfe88]
    F. Pfenning. Single axioms in the implicational prepositional calculus. In 9th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, pages 710–713, Berlin, 1988. Springer Verlag, LNCS 310.Google Scholar
  8. [SL90]
    J. Schumann and R. Letz. PARTHEO: a High Performance Parallel Theorem Prover. In 10th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, pages 40–56. Springer Verlag, LNAI 449, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. [SMV88]
    E. Speckenmeyer, B. Monien, and O. Vornberger. Superlinear speedup for parallel backtracking. In Supercomputing, LNCS 297, pages 985–994. Springer Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. [Wos88]
    L. Wos. Automated Reasoning: 33 Basic Research Problems. Prentice-Hall, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Ertel
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikTechnische Universität MünchenMünchen 2

Personalised recommendations