Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Automating the synthesis of decision procedures in a constructive metatheory

Automating the synthesis of decision procedures in a constructive metatheory We present an approach to the automatic construction of decision procedures, via a detailed example in propositional logic. The approach adapts the methods of proof‐planning and the heuristics for induction to a new domain, that of metatheoretic procedures. This approach starts by providing an alternative characterisation of validity; the proofs of the correctness and completeness of this characterisation, and the existence of a decision procedure, are then amenable to automation in the way we describe. In this paper we identify a set of principled extensions to the heuristics for induction needed to tackle the proof obligations arising in the new problem domain and discuss their integration within the clam‐Oyster system. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Springer Journals

Automating the synthesis of decision procedures in a constructive metatheory

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/automating-the-synthesis-of-decision-procedures-in-a-constructive-st5AVW38In
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Subject
Computer Science; Computer Science, general; Artificial Intelligence (incl. Robotics); Mathematics, general; Complexity
ISSN
1012-2443
eISSN
1573-7470
DOI
10.1023/A:1018943603394
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We present an approach to the automatic construction of decision procedures, via a detailed example in propositional logic. The approach adapts the methods of proof‐planning and the heuristics for induction to a new domain, that of metatheoretic procedures. This approach starts by providing an alternative characterisation of validity; the proofs of the correctness and completeness of this characterisation, and the existence of a decision procedure, are then amenable to automation in the way we describe. In this paper we identify a set of principled extensions to the heuristics for induction needed to tackle the proof obligations arising in the new problem domain and discuss their integration within the clam‐Oyster system.

Journal

Annals of Mathematics and Artificial IntelligenceSpringer Journals

Published: Oct 4, 2004

References