Subsumption-oriented Push-Down Automata

  • F. Barthélemy
  • E. Villemonte de la Clergerie
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 631)


This paper presents Subsumption—oriented Push—Down Auto-mata (SPDA), a very general stack formalism used to describe forest (“AND- OR” tree) traversals. These automata may be used for parsing or the interpretation of logic programs. SPDA allow a Dynamic Programming execution which breaks computations into combinable, sharable and storable sub-computations. They provide computation sharing and operational completeness and solves some of the problems posed by the usual depth-first, left-to-right traversals (as implemented in PROLOG). We give an axiomatization of SPDA and two examples of their use: the evaluation of logic programs and parsing with Tree Adjoining Grammars. SPDA may also serve in other areas such as Constraint Logic Programming, Abstract Interpretations, or Contextual parsing.


Logic Program Regular Expression Basic Computation Abstract Interpretation Horn Clause 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [BVdlC]
    FranÇois Barthélemy and Eric Villemonte de la Clergerie. Subsumption-oriented push-down automata and dynamic programming with subsumption. Technical report, INRIA. to appear.Google Scholar
  2. [JLT75]
    A. K. Joshi, L. Levy, and M. Takahashi. Tree adjunct grammars. Journal of the Computer and System Science, 10(1):136–163, Feb 1975.Google Scholar
  3. [Kan90]
    Tadashi Kanamori. Abstract interpretation based on alexander templates. TR-549, ICOT, March 1990.Google Scholar
  4. [KK90]
    Tadashi Kanamori and Tadashi Kawamura. Abstract interpretation based on OLDT resolution. Research report, ICOT, Tokyo, July 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [Lan74]
    Bernard Lang. Deterministic techniques for efficient non-deterministic parsers. In Proc. of the 2 nd Colloquium on automata, languages and Programming, pages 255–269, Saarbrücken (Germany), 1974. Springer-Verlag (LNCS 14).Google Scholar
  6. [Lan88]
    Bernard Lang. Complete evaluation of Horn clauses: an automata theoretic approach. Technical Report 913, INRIA, Rocquencourt, France, nov 1988. to appear in Int. Journal of Foundations of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  7. [Por86]
    Harry H. III Porter. Earley deduction. Technical Report CS/E-86-002, Oregon Graduate Center, Beaverton, Oregon, March 10 1986.Google Scholar
  8. [Sek89]
    H. Seki. On the power of alexander templates. In Proc. of the 8th ACM symps. on principles of Databases Systems, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [TS86]
    H. Tamaki and T. Sato. OLD resolution with tabulation. In E Shapiro editor, editor, Proc. of Third Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, pages 84–98, London, 1986. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. [VdlC91]
    Eric Villemonte de la Clergerie. A tool for abstract interpretation: Dynamic programming. In Actes JTASPEFL'91, pages 151–156, Bordeaux (FRANCE), Octobre 1991.Google Scholar
  11. [VdlC90]
    Eric Villemonte de la Clergerie. DyALog: une implantation des clauses de horn en programmation dynamique. In Proc. of the 9th Séminaire de Programmation en Logique, pages 207–228. CNET, May 90.Google Scholar
  12. [Vie87]
    Laurent Vieille. Database-complete proof procedures based on SLD resolution. In Proc. of the 4 int. Conf. on Logic Programming, May 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Barthélemy
    • 1
  • E. Villemonte de la Clergerie
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIA RocquencourtLe ChesnayFrance

Personalised recommendations