Skip to main content

Integrating Constraint Solving into Proof Planning

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1794))

Abstract

In proof planning mathematical objects with theory-specific properties have to be constructed. More often than not, mere unification offers little support for this task. However, the integration of constraint solvers into proof planning can sometimes help solving this problem. We present such an integration and discover certain requirements to be met in order to integrate the constraint solver’s efficient activities in a way that is correct and sufficient for proof planning. We explain how the requirements can be met by n extension of the constraint solving technology and describe their implementation in the constraint solver \({\mathcal C}o{\cal SIE}\).

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

Buying options

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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiba, A., Hasegawa, R.: Constraint Logic Programming System - CAL, GDCC and Their Constraint Solvers. In: Proc. of the Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems, ICOT, pp. 113–131 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bartle, R.G., Sherbert, D.R.: Introduction to Real Analysis. John Wiley& Sons, New York (1982)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Benzmueller, C., Cheikhrouhou, L., Fehrer, D., Fiedler, A., Huang, X., Kerber, M., Kohlhase, M., Konrad, K., Meier, A., Melis, E., Schaarschmidt, W., Siekmann, J., Sorge, V.: OMEGA: Towards a Mathematical Assistant. In: McCune, W. (ed.) CADE 1997. LNCS, vol. 1249. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boyer, R.S., Moore, J.S.: Integrating Decision Procedures into Heuristic Theorem Provers: A Case Study of Linear Arithmetic. Machine Intelligence (Logic and the Acquisition of Knowledge) 11 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bundy, A.: The Use of Explicit Plans to Guide Inductive Proofs. In: Lusk, E., Overbeek, R. (eds.) CADE 1988. LNCS, vol. 310. Springer, Heidelberg (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bürckert, H.-J.: A Resolution Principle for Constrained Logics. Artifcial Intelligence 66(2) (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Frühwirth, T.: Constraint Handling Rules. In: Podelski, A. (ed.) Constraint Programming: Basics and Trends. LNCS, vol. 910. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jaffar, J., Lassez, J.-L.: Constraint Logic Programming. In: Proc. 14th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mackworth, A.K.: Consistency in Networks of Relations. Artificial Intelligence 8, 99–118 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Melis, E.: AI-Techniques in Proof Planning. In: European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Melis, E.: Combining Proof Planning with Constraint Solving. In: Proceedings of Calculemus and Types 1998. Electronic Proceedings (1998), http://www.win.tue.nl/math/dw/pp/calc/proceedings.html

  12. Melis, E., Siekmann, J.H.: Knowledge-based Proof Planning. Artificial Intelligence 115(1), 65–105 (1999)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Melis, E., Sorge, V.: Employing External Reasoners in Proof Planning. In: Armando, A., Jebelean, T. (eds.) Calculemus 1999 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mittal, S., Falkenhainer, B.: Dynamic Constraint Satisfaction Problems. In: Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Arti ficial Intelligence, AAAI 1990, Boston, MA, pp. 25–32 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Monfroy, E., Ringeissen, C.: SoleX: a Domain-Independent Scheme for Constraint Solver Extension. In: Calmet, J., Plaza, J. (eds.) AISC 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1476, p. 222. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. The Mozart Consortium. The Mozart Programming System, http://www.mozart-oz.org/

  17. Prawitz, D.: Natural Deduction - A Proof Theoretical Study. Almquist and Wiksell, Stockholm (1965)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Smolka, G.: The Oz programming model. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Current Trends in Computer Science. Springer, Hidleberg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Stickel, M.K.: Automated Deduction by Theory Resolution. In: Proc. of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Stolzenburg, F.: Membership Constraints and Complexity in Logic Programming with Sets. In: Baader, F., Schulz, U. (eds.) Frontiers in Combining Systems. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1996)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Melis, E., Zimmer, J., Müller, T. (2000). Integrating Constraint Solving into Proof Planning. In: Kirchner, H., Ringeissen, C. (eds) Frontiers of Combining Systems. FroCoS 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1794. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/10720084_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/10720084_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67281-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46421-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics