Combinations of abstract domains for logic programming: Open product and generic pattern construction

Science of Computer Programming

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 27-71

  Cortesi, Agostino ^a   Charlier, Baudouin Le ^b   Hentenryck, Pascal Van ^c  

^a CA' FOSCARI UNIVERSITY OF VENICE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NAMUR   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS;

ABSTRACT DOMAINS; GENERIC PRODUCT DOMAINS; OPEN PRODUCT DOMAINS;

LOGIC PROGRAMMING;

EID: 0343005923     PISSN: 01676423     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6423(99)00045-3     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Barbuti R., Giacobazzi R., Levi G. A general framework for semantics-based bottom-up abstract interpretation of logic programs. ACM Trans. Programming Languages and Systems. 15(1):1993;133-181.
2. P. Bigot, S. Debray, K. Marriott, Understanding finiteness analysis using abstract interpretation, Proc. Internat. Joint Conf. Symp. on Logic Programming (JICSLP-92), Washington, DC, November 1992.
3. A. Bossi, M. Gabbrielli, G Levi, M.-C. Meo, Contribution to the semantics of open logic programs, Proc. Internat. Conf. on Fifth Generation Computer Systems, Tokyo, June 1992.
4. Bruynooghe M. A practical framework for the abstract interpretation of logic programs. J. Logic Programming. 10:1991;91-124.
5. Bruynooghe M., Janssens G. Propagation. a new operation in a framework for abstract interpretation of logic programs, Meta-Programming in Logic, 3rd Internat. Workshop Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 649:1992;294-307.
6. M. Codish, M. Falaschi, K. Marriott, Suspension analysis for concurrent logic programs, 8th Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming (ICLP-91), Paris (France), June 1991.
7. Codish M., Dams D., Yardeni E. Derivation and safety of an abstract unification algorithm for groundness and sharing analysis. Furukawa K. Proc. Internat. Conf. of Logic Programming (ICLP'91), Paris, June 1991. 1991;MIT Press.
8. M. Codish, A. Mulkers, M. Bruynooghe, M. Garcia de la Banda, M. Hermenegildo, Improving abstract interpretations by combining domains, Proc. ACM Symp. on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation (PEPM93), Copenhagen, Denmark, June 1993.
9. Codish M., Mulkers A., Bruynooghe M., Garcia de la Banda M., Hermenegildo M. Improving abstract interpretations by combining domains. ACM Trans. Programming Languages Systems. 17(1):1995;28-44.
10. P. Codognet, G. Filé, Computations, abstractions and constraints in logic programs, Proc. 4th Internat. Conf. on Programming Languages (ICCL'92), Oakland, CA, April 1992.
11. Cortesi A., Filé G. Abstract interpretation of logic programs: an abstract domain for groundness, sharing, freeness, and compoundness analysis. Hudak P., Jones N. Proc. ACM-PEPM'91. SIGPLAN NOTICES. Vol. 26, no. 11:1991.
12. A. Cortesi, G. Filé, W. Winsborough, Prop revisited: propositional formulas as abstract domain for groundness analysis, Proc. 6th Annu. IEEE Symp. on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'91), 1991, pp. 322-327.
13. A. Cortesi, G. Filé, W. Winsborough, Comparison of abstract interpretations, Proc. 19th Internat. Colloq. on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP'92), 1992.
14. Cortesi A., Filé G. Comparison and design of abstract domains for sharing analysis. Saccà D. Proc. 8th Italian Conf. on Logic Programming (GULP'93). 1991;Gizzeria, Italy.
15. Cortesi A., Filé G., Winsborough W. Optimal groundness analysis using propositional logic. J. Logic Programming. 27(2):1996;137-167.
16. P. Cousot, R. Cousot, Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints, Conf. Record of 4th ACM Symp. on Programming Languages (POPL'77), Los Angeles, CA, 1977, pp. 238-252.
17. P. Cousot, R. Cousot, Systematic design of program analysis frameworks, Conf. Record of 6th ACM Symp. on Programming Languages (POPL'79), San Antonio, TX, 1979, pp. 269-282.
18. Cousot P., Cousot R. Abstract interpretation and application to logic programs. J. Logic Programming. 13(2-3):1992;103-179.
19. S. Debray, On the complexity of dataflow analysis of logic programs, Proc. 19th ICALP, Vienna, Austria, July 1992.
20. Debray S. Efficient dataflow analysis of logic programs. J. ACM. 39(4):1992;949-984.
21. Debray S., Mishra P. Denotational and operational semantics for prolog. J. Logic Programming. 5(1):1988;61-91.
22. A. Deutsch, A storeless model of aliasing and its abstraction using finite representations of right-regular equivalence relations, 4th IEEE Intern. Conf. on Computer Languages (ICCL'92), San Francisco, CA, April 1992.
23. Dincbas M., Simonis H., Van Hentenryck P. Solving large combinatorial problems in logic programming. J. Logic Programming. 8(1-2):1990;75-93.
24. Englebert V., Le Charlier B., Roland D., Van Hentenryck P. Generic abstract interpretation algorithms for prolog: two optimization techniques and their experimental evaluation. Software Practice Experience. 23(4):1993;419-459.
25. Granger P. Improving the results of static analyses programs by local decreasing iteration. Shyamasundar R.K. Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 652:1992;68-79.
26. Heintze N., Jaffar J. An engine for logic program analysis. IEEE 7th Annu. Symp. on Logic in Computer Science. 1992.
27. M. Hermenegildo, K. Muthukumar, Combined determination of sharing and freeness of program variables through abstract interpretation, 8th Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming (ICLP-91), Paris (France), June 1991.
28. Hermenegildo M., Warren R., Debray S. Global flow analysis as a practical compilation tool. J. Logic Programming. 13(4):1992;349-367.
29. Horiuchi K., Kanamori T. Polymorphic type inference in prolog by abstract interpretation. Logic Programming '87, Proc. 6th Conf., Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 315:1987;195-214.
30. D. Jacobs, A. Langen, Accurate and efficient approximation of variable aliasing in logic programs, Proc. North-American Conf. on Logic Programming (NACLP-89), Cleveland, OH, October 1989.
31. N.D. Jones, H. Sondergaard, A Semantics-Based Framework for the Abstract Interpretation of Prolog, Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 1987, pp. 123-142.
32. M. Kifer, E.L. Lozinskii, A framework for an efficient implementation of deductive databases, Proc. 6th Advanced Database Symp., 1986.
33. Kifer M., Lozinskii E.L. SYGRAF. implementing logic programs in a database style IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 14(7):1988;922-935.
34. B. Le Charlier, K. Musumbu, P. Van Hentenryck, A generic abstract interpretation algorithm and its complexity analysis (extended abstract). 8th Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming (ICLP-91), Paris (France), June 1991.
35. B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Experimental evaluation of a generic abstract interpretation algorithm for prolog, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 1993, An extended abstract appeared in the Proc. 4th IEEE International Conference on Computer Languages (ICCL'92), San Francisco, CA, April 1992.
36. C. Leclre, B. Le Charlier, Two dual abstract operations to duplicate, eliminate, rename, introduce, and equalize place-holders occurring inside abstract descriptions, Technical Report RR-98-009, Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix, Institut d'Informatique, June 1998.
37. B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, A universal top-down fixpoint algorithm, Technical Report CS-92-25, CS Department, Brown University, 1992.
38. B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Reexecution in abstract interpretation of prolog, Proc. of the Internat. Joint Conf. Symp. on Logic Programming (JICSLP-92), Washington, DC, November 1992.
39. B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Groundness analysis for prolog: implementation and evaluation of the domain prop, Proc. ACM Symp. on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation (PEPM93), Copenhagen, Denmark, June 1993.
40. Le Charlier B., Leclere C., Rossi S., Cortesi A. Automated verification of prolog programs. J. Logic Programming (Special Issue on Synthesis) Transformation Analy. Logic Programs. 39(1-3):1999;3-42.
41. K. Marriott, H. S ø ndergaard, Bottom-up abstract interpretation of logic programs, Proc. 5th Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming, Seattle, WA, August 1988, pp. 733-748.
42. K. Marriott, H. S ø ndergaard, Notes for a tutorial on abstract interpretation of logic programs, North American Conf. on Logic Programming, Cleveland, OH, 1989.
43. K. Marriott, H. S ø ndergaard, Semantics-based dataflow analysis of logic programs, Information Processing-89, San Francisco, CA, 1989, pp. 601-606.
44. Marriott K., S ø ndergaard H. Precise and efficient groundness analysis for logic programs. ACM LOPLAS. 2:1993;81-196.
45. C. Mellish, The automatic generation of mode declarations for prolog programs, Technical Report DAI Report 163, Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 1981.
46. A. Mulkers, W. Winsborough, M. Bruynooghe, Analysis of shared data structures for compile-time garbage collection in logic programs, 7th Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming (ICLP-90), Jerusalem, Israel, June 1990.
47. A. Mycroft, Completeness and predicate-based abstract interpretation, Proc. ACM Symp. on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation (PEPM93), Copenhagen, Denmark, June 1993.
48. K. Musumbu, Interpretation abstraite de programmes prolog, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Namur (Belgium), September 1990.
49. K. Muthukumar, M. Hermenegildo, Determination of variable dependence information through abstract interpretation, Proc. North American Conf. on Logic Programming (NACLP-89), Cleveland, OH, October 1989.
50. F. Nielson, Tensor products generalize the relational data flow analysis method, Proc. 4th Hungarian Comp. Sci. Conf., 1985, pp. 211-225.
51. U. Nilsson, Systematic Semantic Approximations of Logic Programs, Proc. PLILP 90, Linkoping, Sweeden, August 1990, pp. 293-306.
52. S ø ndergaard H. An application of abstract interpretation of logic programs: occur check reduction. Proc. of ESOP'86, Sarrbruecken (FRG). 1986;327-338.
53. Sterling L., Shapiro E. The Art of Prolog. Advanced Programming Techniques:1986;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
54. Taylor A. LIPS on a MIPS. Results from a Prolog Compiler for a RISC Warren D.D., Szeredi P. Logic Programming, Proc. 7th Internat. Conf. 1990;174-185 MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
55. Van Hentenryck P. Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Programming, Logic Programming Series. 1989;The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
56. P. Van Hentenryck, O. Degimbe, B. Le Charlier, L. Michel, Abstract interpretation of prolog based on OLDT-resolution, Technical Report No. CS-93-05, CS Department, Brown University, 1993.
57. Van Hentenryck P., Degimbe O., Le Charlier B., Michel L. The impact of granularity in abstract interpretation of prolog. Cousot P.et al. Static Analysis, 3rd Internat. Workshop, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 724. 1993;Springer, Berlin.
58. Van Hentenryck P., Cortesi A., Le Charlier B. Evaluation of the domain Prop. J. Logic Programming. 23(3):1995;237-278.
59. Van Hentenryck P., Cortesi A., Le Charlier B. Type analysis of prolog using type graphs. J. Logic Programming. 22(3):1995;179-208.
60. Van Roy P., Despain A. High-performance logic programming with the aquarius prolog compiler. IEEE Computer. 25(1):1992;54-68.
61. Winsborough W. Multiple specialization using minimal-function graph semantics. J. Logic Programming. 13(2&3):1992;259-290.