2008
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-89982-2_43
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Termination Analysis of CHR Revisited

Abstract: Abstract. Today, two distinct direct approaches to prove termination of CHR programs exist. The first approach, by T. Frühwirth, proves termination of CHR programs without propagation. The second, by Voets et al., deals with programs that contain propagation. It is however less powerful on programs without propagation. In this paper, we present new termination conditions that are strictly more powerful than those from previous approaches and that are also applicable to a new class of programs. Furthermore, we … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In theory, CHRs could be treated as an instance of an abstract rewriting system. However, the fact that matching involves more than one constraint at once sets them apart from other rewriting systems: both confluence (Abdennadher 1997;Duck et al 2007) and termination (Voets et al 2008;Pilozzi and De Schreye 2008) require specific techniques. In this section we study the applicability of those techniques to our setting.…”
Section: Confluence and Termination Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In theory, CHRs could be treated as an instance of an abstract rewriting system. However, the fact that matching involves more than one constraint at once sets them apart from other rewriting systems: both confluence (Abdennadher 1997;Duck et al 2007) and termination (Voets et al 2008;Pilozzi and De Schreye 2008) require specific techniques. In this section we study the applicability of those techniques to our setting.…”
Section: Confluence and Termination Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A rigid | · | is invariant under substitution: for all constraints C and substitutions θ, |C| = |θC|. We can redefine this notion in such a way that the techniques of (Frühwirth 2000;Voets et al 2008;Pilozzi and De Schreye 2008) keep working:…”
Section: See Appendixmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To prove Ground Termination we can rely on the existing state-of-the-art work on termination for CHR programs, such as (Frühwirth 2000) and (Pilozzi and Schreye 2008). For example, we can prove that the rule (F [a] b ⇐⇒ b = [c], F a c) is ground terminating by defining rank ([x]) = 1 + rank (x).…”
Section: Relaxed Conditions To Guarantee Soundness For Terminating Goalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, type information is useful in this context. When used as a basis for determining the possible calls to the program, it leads to compiler optimisations [11], more precise termination conditions [4,7] and more refined interpretations for proving termination [1,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%