Skip to main content

On the Complexity of H-Subsumption

  • Conference paper
Computer Science Logic (CSL 1998)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1584))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The importance of subsumption as a redundancy elimination method in automated theorem proving is generally acknowledged. For a given Herbrand universe H, it can be further strengthened to the so-called H-subsumption, i.e.: A clause D is H-subsumed by a clause set \({\cal C}\), iff for every H-ground instance of D there is a clause \(C \in {\cal C}\), s.t. C subsumes . In recent time, H-subsumption has gained increasing importance especially in the field of automated model building (cf. e.g. [5], [4], [6]). Furthermore, it can be easily shown that H-subsumption may be incorporated as a redundancy deletion rule into many familiar (resolution- and paramodulation-based) inference systems without destroying the refutational completeness.

However, no satisfactory algorithm for checking H-subsumption has been presented so far. We therefore have to investigate the inherent complexity of H-subsumption in order to explain this lack of efficient algorithms: The main result of this work is a Π\(_{\rm 2}^{p}\)-completeness proof for H-subsumption even if it is subjected to some strong restrictions. Hence, unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses to the first level, H-subsumption is non-polynomially more complex than ordinary subsumption.

Finally we present a new algorithm for H-subsumption whose complexity is compared with previously known algorithms (i.e.: from [5] and [4] on the one hand and from [6] on the other hand). The main advantage of our approach is that the total size of an H-subsumption problem (i.e.: in particular, the term depth of the expressions involved) only has polynomial influence on the overall (time and space) complexity. This is in great contrast to the other two approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bachmair, L., Ganzinger, H.: Rewrite-based Equational Theorem Proving with Selection and Simplification. Journal of Logic and Computation 4(3), 217–247 (1994)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Siekmann, J.H.: Unification Theory. In: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Comon, H., Lescanne, P.: Equational Problems and Disunification. Journal of Symbolic Computation 7, 371–425 (1989)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Caferra, R., Peltier, N.: Decision Procedures using Model Building Techniques. In: Kleine Büning, H. (ed.) CSL 1995. LNCS, vol. 1092, pp. 130–144. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caferra, R., Zabel, N.: Extending Resolution for Model Construction. In: van Eijck, J. (ed.) JELIA 1990. LNCS, vol. 478, pp. 153–169. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Fermüller, C., Leitsch, A.: Hyperresolution and Automated Model Building. Journal of Logic and Computation 6(2), 173–230 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability, A guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York (1979)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Hsiang, J., Rusinowitch, M.: Proving Refutational Completeness of Theorem- Proving Strategies: The Transfinite Semantic Tree Method. Journal of the ACM 38(3), 559–587 (1991)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Kowalski, R., Hayes, P.J.: Semantic Trees in Automated Theorem Proving. Machine Intelligence 4, 87–101 (1969)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Leitsch, A.: The Resolution Calculus. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Nieuwenhuis, R., Rubio, A.: Theorem Proving with ordering and equality constrained clauses. Journal of Symbolic Computation 11, 1–32 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pichler, R.: Algorithms on atomic representations of herbrand models. In: Dix, J., Fariñas del Cerro, L., Furbach, U. (eds.) JELIA 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1489, pp. 199–215. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Pichler, R.: Completeness and redundancy in constrained clause logic. In: Caferra, R., Salzer, G. (eds.) FTP 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1761, pp. 193–203. Springer, Heidelberg (1998), http://www.logic.at/ftp98

    Google Scholar 

  14. Stockmeyer, L.J.: The Polynomial Time Hierarchy. Journal of Theoretical Computer Science 3, 1–12 (1976)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pichler, R. (1999). On the Complexity of H-Subsumption. In: Gottlob, G., Grandjean, E., Seyr, K. (eds) Computer Science Logic. CSL 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1584. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/10703163_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/10703163_24

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65922-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-48855-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics