What you always wanted to know about clause graph resolution

Eisinger, Norbert

doi:10.1007/3-540-16780-3_100

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Partial execution has long been in the folklore of logic programming. The notion is implicit in Kowalski's connection-graph resolution proof procedure (1975;Eisinger, 1986). A related notion in functional programming is Burstall and Darlington's unfolding rule for program transformation (1977).…”

Section: Chapter 4 Further Topics In Natural-language Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Prolog and Natural Language Analysis

Pereira

Shieber

1988

Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This digital edition of Pereira and Shieber's Prolog and Natural-Language Analysis is distributed at no charge by Microtome Publishing under a license described in the front matter and at the web site. A hardbound edition (ISBN 0-9719997-0-4), printed on acidfree paper with library binding and including all appendices and two indices (and without these inline interruptions), is available from www.mtome.com and other booksellers. Preface to Millennial Reissue This reissue of Prolog and Natural-Language Analysis varies only slightly from the original edition. The figures have been reworked. Thanks to Peter Arvidson for the setting of the new figures. A number of primarily typographical errata from the first edition have been fixed in this reissue. Thanks to

show abstract

Section: Chapter 4 Further Topics In Natural-language Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Prolog and Natural Language Analysis

Pereira

Shieber

1988

Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of parallel computers implies that the algorithms should be redesigned to efficiently exploit the parallel capacity of the machine. In the case of theorem proving systems, methods such as Graph Resolution [14] were successfully adapted to parallel computers [20], but usually theorem proving procedures are not easy to parallelize. An alternative solution is to design special algorithms for specific parallel architectures (e.g., [11], [21]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concurrent inference through dual transformation

Bittencourt¹

1998

Logic Journal of IGPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents two somewhat independent results and sketches a mechanism that could tie these results together to form an automated theorem proving method. The first point is a correct and complete inference method for first-order logic based on the transformation between conjunctive and disjunctive canonical normal forms. This method, although apparently very inefficient, presents interesting properties, such as not presenting external inference rules. The second point is a concurrent algorithm for dual transformation. This algorithm is presented in a general framework that can be specialized to model several formal systems. Finally, based on the representation adopted to define the algorithm, a dual transformation theorem proving method is sketched. 1

show abstract

A new reduction rule for the connection graph proof procedure

Munch

1988

J Autom Reasoning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What you always wanted to know about clause graph resolution

Cited by 10 publications

References 17 publications

Prolog and Natural Language Analysis

Prolog and Natural Language Analysis

Concurrent inference through dual transformation

A new reduction rule for the connection graph proof procedure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About