Skip to main content

Automatic Theorem Proving With Renamable and Semantic Resolution

  • Chapter
Automation of Reasoning

Part of the book series: Symbolic Computation ((1064))

  • 556 Accesses

Abstract

The theory of J. A. Robinson’s resolution principle, an inference rule for first-order predicate calculus, is unified and extended. A theorem-proving computer program based on the new theory is proposed and the proposed semantic resolution program is compared with hyper-resolution and set-of-support resolution programs. Renamable and semantic resolution are defined and shown to be identical. Given a model M, semantic resolution is the resolution of a latent clash in which each “electron” is at least sometimes false under M; the nucleus is at least sometimes true under M.

The completeness theorem for semantic resolution and all previous completeness theorems for resolution (including ordinary, hyper-, and set-of-support resolution) can be derived from a slightly more general form of the following theorem. If U is a finite, truth-functionally un-satisfiable set of nonempty clauses and if M is a ground model, then there exists an unresolved maximal semantic clashE 1 , E 2 , ..., E q , C with nucleus C such that any set containing C and one or more of the electrons E1, E2, ..., Eq is an unresolved semantic clash in U.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davis, M., and Putnam, H. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7 (1960), 201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Davis, M., and Putnam, H. Eliminating the irrelevant from mechanical proofs. Proc. 15th Symp. in Appl. Math., Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R. I., 1963, pp. 15–30.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Feigenbaum, E., and Feldman, J. (Eds.). Computers and Thought. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Gelernter, H. Realization of a geometry theorem proving machine. Proc. Int. Conf. on Information Processing, UNESCO House, Paris, 1959, pp. 273–282. (Reprinted in [3], pp. 134–152.)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gelernter, H., Hansen, J. R., and Loveland, D. W. Empirical explorations of the geometry theorem machine. Proc. 1960 Western Joint Comput. Conf., Vol. 17, pp. 143–147. (Reprinted in [3], pp. 153–163.)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gilmore, P. C. A program for the production of proofs for theorems derivable within the first order predicate calculus from axioms. Proc. Int. Conf. on Information Processing, UNESCO House, Paris, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mccarthy, J. Programs with common sense. Proc. Conf. on Mechanization of Thought Processes. English National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex, England, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Meltzer, B. Theorem proving for computers: some results on resolution and renaming. Computer J. 8 (1966), 341–343.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., and Simon, H. Empirical explorations of the logic theory machine, a case study in heuristic. Proc. 1957 Western Joint Comput. Conf., Vol. 11, pp. 218–230. (Reprinted in [3], pp. 109–133.)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reynolds, J. Unpublished seminar notes. Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif., fall 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Robinson, J. A. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. J. ACM 12,1 (Jan. 1965), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Robinson, J. A.. Automatic deduction with hyper-resolution. Int. J. Computer Math. 1 (1965), 227–234.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Robinson, J. A.. A review of automatic theorem proving. Proc. Symp. in Appl. Math., Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R. I., 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Slagle, J. R. A multipurpose, theorem proving, heuristic program that learns. Information Processing 1965, Proc. IFIP Congress 1965, Vol. 2, pp. 323–324.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Slagle, J. R.. A proposed preference strategy using sufficiency resolution for answering questions. UCRL-14361, Lawrence Radiation Lab., Livermore, Calif., Aug. 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Slagle, J. R.. Experiments with a deductive, question-answering program. Comm. ACM 8 (Dec. 1965), 792–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang, H. Formalization and automatic theorem proving. Information Processing 1965, Proc. IFIP Congress 1965, Vol. 1, pp. 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wos, L., Carson, D. F., and Robinson, G. A. The unit preference strategy in theorem proving. Proc. AFIPS 1964 Fall Joint Comput. Conf., Vol. 26, pp. 616–621.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wos, L., Robinson, G. A., and Carson, D. F. Efficiency and completeness of the set of support strategy in theorem proving. J. ACM 12, 4 (Oct. 1965), 536–541.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1967 Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Slagle, J.R. (1967). Automatic Theorem Proving With Renamable and Semantic Resolution. In: Siekmann, J.H., Wrightson, G. (eds) Automation of Reasoning. Symbolic Computation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-81955-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-81955-1_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-81957-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-81955-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics