Native Preemptive Threads in SWI-Prolog

Wielemaker, Jan

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24599-5_23

Cited by 48 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The resulting language can express for example the input data for performing such unit tests, the expected output, the number of times that the unit tests should be repeated, etc. In contrast to previous work in this area (e.g., [1], [17], or the unit test framework recently included in SWI-Prolog [16]), a key contribution of our approach is that these unit tests blend in with the assertion language and reuse the overall framework. In particular, only test drivers need to be added because the assertions and their run-time tests act as the checkers for the cases defined by the unit tests.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Software Testing and Run-Time Checking in an Assertion Verification Framework

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present a framework that unifies unit testing and runtime verification (as well as static verification and static debugging). A key contribution of our overall approach is that we preserve the use of a unified assertion language for all of these tasks. We first describe a method for compiling run-time checks for (parts of) assertions which cannot be verified at compile-time via program transformation. This transformation allows checking preconditions and postconditions, including conditional postconditions, properties at arbitrary program points, and certain computational properties. Most importantly, we propose a minimal addition to the assertion language which allows defining unit tests to be run in order to detect possible violations of the (partial) specifications expressed by the assertions. We have implemented the framework within the Ciao/CiaoPP system and effectively applied it to the verification of ISO Prolog compliance and to the detection of different types of bugs in the Ciao system source code. Experimental results are presented that illustrate different trade-offs among program size, running time, or levels of verbosity of the messages shown to the user.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Software Testing and Run-Time Checking in an Assertion Verification Framework

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless using a DBMSs within these applications can provide numerous advantages [88]. Advantages of using DBMS include their support for transaction management and their improved mechanism for integrity and consistency check.…”

Section: Building a Kb Upon A Relational Databasementioning

confidence: 99%

Representing and Reasoning about Changing Spatial Extensions of Geographic Features

Campelo

Bennett

2013

Spatial Information Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Their paper investigated two types of inter-process communication, with results showing near-linear speedups on a 10 processor machine. Wielemaker (2003). This implements a parallel version of a randomised search found in the Aleph system.…”

Section: Parallel Execution For Ilpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parallel ILP for distributed-memory architectures

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth of machine-generated relational databases, both in the sciences and in industry, is rapidly outpacing our ability to extract useful information from them by manual means. This has brought into focus machine learning techniques like Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) that are able to extract human-comprehensible models for complex relational data. The price to pay is that ILP techniques are not efficient: they can be seen as performing a form of discrete optimisation, which is known to be computationally hard; and the complexity is usually some super-linear function of the number of examples. While lit- Learn (2009) 74: 257-279 tle can be done to alter the theoretical bounds on the worst-case complexity of ILP systems, some practical gains may follow from the use of multiple processors. In this paper we survey the state-of-the-art on parallel ILP. We implement several parallel algorithms and study their performance using some standard benchmarks. The principal findings of interest are these: (1) of the techniques investigated, one that simply constructs models in parallel on each processor using a subset of data and then combines the models into a single one, yields the best results; and (2) sequential (approximate) ILP algorithms based on randomized searches have lower execution times than (exact) parallel algorithms, without sacrificing the quality of the solutions found.

show abstract

Native Preemptive Threads in SWI-Prolog

Cited by 48 publications

References 8 publications

Integrating Software Testing and Run-Time Checking in an Assertion Verification Framework

Integrating Software Testing and Run-Time Checking in an Assertion Verification Framework

Representing and Reasoning about Changing Spatial Extensions of Geographic Features

Parallel ILP for distributed-memory architectures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About