Discovery of invariants through automated theory formation

Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, EPTCS

Volumn 55, Issue , 2011, Pages 1-19

  Llano, Maria Teresa ^a   Ireland, Andrew ^a   Pease, Alison ^b  

^a HERIOT WATT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COMPUTER SCIENCE;

AUTOMATED THEORY FORMATION; AUTOMATIC DISCOVERY; DESIGN DECISIONS; EVENT-B; HEURISTIC APPROACH; MODELLING SYSTEMS; PROOF OBLIGATIONS;

HEURISTIC METHODS;

EID: 84889584084     PISSN: 20752180     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.4204/EPTCS.55.1     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. J-R. Abrial (2010): Modeling in Event-B - System and Software Engineering. Cambridge University Press.
2. J-R. Abrial, M. Butler, S. Hallerstede, T. Hoang, F. Mehta & L. Voisin (2010): Rodin: an open toolset for modelling and reasoning in Event-B. STTT 12(6), pp. 447-466, doi:10.1007/s10009-010-0145-y.
3. M. Butler & D. Yadav (2008): An incremental development of the Mondex system in Event-B. Formal Aspects of Computing 20(1), pp. 61-77, doi:10.1007/s00165-007-0061-4.
4. S. Colton (2002): Automated Theory Formation in Pure Mathematics. Springer-Verlag.
5. S. Colton, A. Bundy & T. Walsh (2000): Automatic Identification of Mathematical Concepts. In: 17th International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, USA, pp. 183-190.
6. S. Colton, A. Bundy & T. Walsh (2000): Automatic invention of integer sequences. In: 16th IJCAI, pp. 786-791.
7. S. Colton, A. Bundy & T. Walsh (2000): On the Notion of Interestingness in Automated Mathematical Discovery. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 53(3), pp. 351-375, doi:10.1006/ijhc.2000.0394.
8. S. Colton & I. Miguel (2001): Constraint Generation via Automated Theory Formation. In: 7th International Conference on the Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, doi:10.1007/3-540-45578-7 42.
9. M. Ernst, J. Perkins, P. Guo, S. McCamant, C. Pacheco, M. Tschantz & C. Xiao (2007): The Daikon system for dynamic detection of likely invariants. Science of Computer Programming 69(1-3), pp. 35-45, doi:10.1016/j.scico.2007.01.015.
10. A. Ireland, G. Grov, M. Llano & M. Butler (2011): Reasoned Modelling Critics: Turning Failed Proofs into Modelling Guidance. Science of Computer Programming doi:10.1016/j.scico.2011.03.006.
11. M. Johansson, L. Dixon & A. Bundy (2010): Case-Analysis for Rippling and Inductive Proof. In: 1st International Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving, LNCS 6127, Springer, pp. 291-306, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14052-5 21.
12. D. Lenat (1976): AM: An Artificial Intelligence approach to discovery in mathematics. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.
13. D. Lenat (1983): Eurisko: A program which learns new heuristics and domain concepts. Artificial Intelligence 21, doi:10.1016/S0004-3702(83)80005-8.
14. M. Leuschel & M. Butler (2003): ProB: A Model Checker for B. In: International Symposium of Formal Methods Europe, LNCS 2805, Springer, pp. 855-874, doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45236-2 46.
15. M. Llano, G. Grov & A. Ireland (2010): Automatic Guidance for Refinement Based Formal Methods. 5th workshop on Automated Formal Methods (AFM'10), a satellite workshop of the 22nd International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV'10). Also available via: School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Technical Report HW-MACS-TR-0076; School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Report EDI-INF-RR-1371.
16. E. Maclean, A. Ireland, L. Dixon & R. Atkey (2009): Refinement and Term Synthesis in Loop Invariant Generation. In: 2nd International Workshop on Invariant Generation (WING'09), a satellite workshop of ETAPS'09.
17. R. McCasland, A. Bundy & S. Autexier (2007): Automated Discovery of Inductive Theorems. In: From Insight to Proof: Festschrift in Honour of Andrzej Trybulec, Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 10(23), University of Białystok, pp. 135-149.
18. W. McCune (2003): OTTER 3.3 Reference Manual. CoRR cs.SC/0310056.
19. A. Meier, V. Sorge & S. Colton (2002): Employing Theory Formation to Guide Proof Planning. In: AISC/Calculemus'02, LNAI 2385, Springer, doi:10.1007/3-540-45470-5 25.
20. O. Montano-Rivas, R. McCasland, L. Dixon & A. Bundy (2010): Scheme-Based Synthesis of Inductive Theories. In: MICAI, LNCS 6437, pp. 348-361, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16761-4 31.
21. A. Pease, A. Smaill, S. Colton, A. Ireland, M. Llano, R. Ramezani, G. Grov & M. Guhe (2010): Applying Lakatos-style reasoning to AI problems. In: Thinking Machines and the philosophy of computer science: Concepts and principles, IGI Global, PA, USA, pp. 149-174, doi:10.4018/978-1-61692-014-2.
22. G. Ritchie & F. Hanna (1990): AM: a case study in methodology. In D. Partridge & Y. Wilks, editors: The foundations of AI: a sourcebook, CUP, Cambridge, pp. 247-265, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511663116.024.
23. C. Snook & M. Butler (2006): UML-B: Formal modeling and design aided by UML. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology. 15(1), pp. 92-122, doi:10.1145/1125808.1125811.