Edgar Knapp. Soundness and relative completeness of unity logic. Technical Report Department of Computer Science, The University of Texas at Austin, October 1990.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....proof steps, and is (relatively) complete, even though it contains fewer proof rules than other temporal logics. This suggests that Unity is simpler and that proofs are more straightforward, since one has fewer necessary tools to work with. The soundness and completeness of Unity is discussed in[24, 18, 10, 14]. 2.2 The Boyer Moore Logic and Prover In a mechanically verified proof, all proof steps are validated by a computer program called a theorem prover. Hence, whether a mechanically verified proof is correct is really a question of whether the theorem prover is sound. This question, which may be ....

Edgar Knapp. Soundness and relative completeness of unity logic. Technical Report Department of Computer Science, The University of Texas at Austin, October 1990.

....and that Unity is less expressive than full first order temporal logic. Unity provides proof rules for taking large formal proof steps, and is (relatively) complete, even though it contains fewer proof rules than other temporal logics. The soundness and completeness of Unity are discussed in [5,9,11]. To see how we use Unity to model storage jamming, let us return to our example jammer, now modeled in Unity logic as program wj. We begin by describing the file system as an array of files and the user input as a tuple that contains the intended word processor operation and the name of its ....

KNAPP, E. Soundness and Relative Completeness of Unity Logic. Technical Report, University of Texas at Austin, Dept. of Computer Science, October, 1990.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC