2011
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-22944-2_4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Infinite Computation, Co-induction and Computational Logic

Abstract: Abstract. We give an overview of the coinductive logic programming paradigm. We discuss its applications to modeling ω-automata, model checking, verification, non-monotonic reasoning, developing SAT solvers, etc. We also discuss future research directions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This semantics is efficiently implemented using the soft-cut control construct found on several Prolog compilers, including all of those that provide the necessary minimal support for rational terms. 4 The following example of the compilation of the coinductive predicate p/1 in Listing 1.1 illustrates our current implementation (with all non-relevant details, including the internal names of the coinductive and preflight predicates, abstracted for clarity of presentation): In the code above, the predicate member/2 has its traditional inductive definition and the (*->)/2 operator denotes the soft-cut control construct, as found on several Prolog compilers such as ECLiPSe, GNU Prolog, SWI-Prolog, and YAP. 5 When the coinductive_success_hook/1 or the coinductive_success_hook/2 hook predicate are defined for a coinductive predicate, they are called in the place of the goal true/0 in the code in Listing 1.4 (the Logtalk compiler looks first for a user definition of the arity two version of the hook predicate).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This semantics is efficiently implemented using the soft-cut control construct found on several Prolog compilers, including all of those that provide the necessary minimal support for rational terms. 4 The following example of the compilation of the coinductive predicate p/1 in Listing 1.1 illustrates our current implementation (with all non-relevant details, including the internal names of the coinductive and preflight predicates, abstracted for clarity of presentation): In the code above, the predicate member/2 has its traditional inductive definition and the (*->)/2 operator denotes the soft-cut control construct, as found on several Prolog compilers such as ECLiPSe, GNU Prolog, SWI-Prolog, and YAP. 5 When the coinductive_success_hook/1 or the coinductive_success_hook/2 hook predicate are defined for a coinductive predicate, they are called in the place of the goal true/0 in the code in Listing 1.4 (the Logtalk compiler looks first for a user definition of the arity two version of the hook predicate).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We assume that the reader is familiar with the theoretical work in coinduction (see e.g. [4,5]). Therefore, this paper is written from a practical, technical point-of-view.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Coinductive logic programming can be used for reasoning about unfounded sets, behavioral properties of (interactive) pro-grams, etc., as well as elegantly proving liveness properties in model checking, type inference in functional programming, etc. [3].…”
Section: Coinductive Logic Programmingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even with the restriction to rational proofs, there are many applications of coinductive logic programming. These include model checking, modeling ω-automata, non-monotonic reasoning, etc [3].…”
Section: Coinductive Logic Programmingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, there are also many approaches to solve programs under the well-founded semantics, such as XSB [15] and XOLDTNF [6]. For the co-stable model semantics [16,9], there is no specific solving systems designed yet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%