A rewrite rule based framework for combining decision procedures preliminary draft

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2309, Issue , 2002, Pages 87-102

  Kapur, Deepak ^a  

^a MSC01 1070   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS;

CANONICAL FORM; COMBINATION APPROACHES; DECISION PROCEDURE; INDUCTIVE REASONING; REWRITE RULES; SOUNDNESS AND COMPLETENESS; TIGHT INTEGRATIONS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 84947904374     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45988-x_8     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. A. Armando, S. Ranise, and M. Rusinowitch, “Uniform derivation of superposition based decision procedures,” Proc. Computer Science in Logic (CSL’01), 2001.
2. C.W. Barrett, D.L. Dill and J. Levitt, “Validity checking for combinations of theories with equality,” Proc. Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (eds. Srivas and Camilleri), LNAI, Nov. 1996, 187-201.
3. C.W. Barrett, D.L. Dill and A. Stump, “A framework for cooperating decision procedures,” Proc. CADE-17 (ed. Mcallester), LNAI 1831, Pittsburgh, June 2000.
4. N.S. Bjorner, Integrating Decision Procedures for Temporal Verification. Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford University, CA, Nov. 1998.
5. D. Cyrluk, P. Lincoln, and N. Shankar, “On Shostak’s decision procedures for combination of theories,” Proc. Automated Deduction-CADE 13, LNAI 1104 (eds. McRobbie and Slaney), Springer Verlag (1996), 463-477.
6. P.J. Downey, R. Sethi, and R.E. Tarjan, “Variations on the common subexpression problem,” JACM, 27(4) (1980), 758-771
7. J. Giesl and D. Kapur, “Decidable classes of inductive theormes,” Proc. Intl. Joint Conf. Automated Reasoning, IJCAR-2001, Siena, Italy, LNAI, June 2001.
8. D. Kapur, “Shostak’s congruence closure as completion,” Proc. RTA’97 (ed. Comon), LNAI 1232, May 1997, Spain.
9. D. Kapur, “Rewriting, decision procedures and lemma speculation for automated hardware verification,” Proc. Theorem Provers in Higher-order Logics, TPHOL New Jersey (ed. Gunter and Felty), Springer LNAI 1275, August 1997, 171-182.
10. D. Kapur, “Rewriting, Induction and Decision Procedures: A Case Study of Presburger Arithmetic,” Symbolic-algebraic methods and verification methods-Theory and Applications, (eds. G. Alefeld, J. Rohn, S. Rump, T. Yamamato), Springer Mathematics, Wien-NY, 2001, 129-144.
11. D. Kapur, A Rewrite Rule based Framework for Combining Decision Procedures. Tech. Report, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of New Mexico, 2002.
12. D. Kapur and X. Nie, “Reasoning about numbers in Tecton,” Proc. 8th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, (ISMIS’94), Charlotte, North Carolina, October 1994, 57-70.
13. D. Kapur and M. Subramaniam, “New uses of linear arithmetic in automated theorem proving for induction,” J. Automated Reasoning, 16(1-2) (1996), 39-78
14. D. Kapur and M. Subramaniam, “Extending decision procedures with induction schemes,” Proc. CADE-17, LNAI 1831, Pittsburgh, June 2000, 324-345.
15. D. Kapur and M. Subramaniam, “Using an induction prover for verifying arithmetic circuits,” Intl. J. of Software Tools for Technology Transfer, Springer Verlag, Vol. 3(1), Sep. 2000, 32-65.
16. D. Kapur and H. Zhang, “An overview of Rewrite Rule Laboratory (RRL),” Computers and Math. with Applications, 29(2) (1995), 91-114.
17. J.-L. Lassez and M.J. Maher, On Fourier’s algorithm for linear arithmetic constraints, J. of Automated Reasoning, 9, 1992, 373-379.
18. J. R. Levitt, Formal Verification Techniques for Digital Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, CA, Dec. 1998.
19. G. Nelson, and D.C. Oppen, “Simplification by cooperating decision procedures,” ACM Tran. on Programming Languages and Systems 1 (2) (1979) 245-257.
20. G. Nelson, and D.C. Oppen, “Fast decision procedures based on congruence closure,” JACM, 27(2) (1980), 356-364.
21. D. Oppen, “Reasoning about recursively defined data structures,” Proc. 5th Annual Symposium on Principles of Prog. Langs. (1979), 151-157.
22. D. Oppen, “Complexity, convexity and combination of theories,” Theoretical Computer Science, 12, 1980.
23. W. Pugh, “The Omega test: A fast practical integer programming algorithm for dependence analysis,” CACM, 35(8), Aug 1992, 102-114.
24. H. Ruess and N. Shankar, “Deconstructing Shostak,” Proc. LICS 2001, Boston, June 2001.
25. R.E. Shostak, “An algorithm for reasoning about equality,” Communications of ACM, 21(7) (1978), 583-585.
26. R.E. Shostak, “Deciding combination of theories,” JACM 31(1), (1984) 1-12.
27. A. Tiwari, Decision Procedures in Automated Deduction. Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Computer Science, State University of New York, Stony Brook, August 2000.
28. H. Zhang, D. Kapur, and M.S. Krishnamoorthy, “A mechanizable induction principle for equational Specifications,” Proc. CADE-9, Argonne, IL (eds. Lusk& Overbeek), Springer LNAI 310, May 1988, 162-181.