Gegg-Harrison, T. S.: Representing Logic Program Schemata in Prolog. In L. Sterling (ed.) Procs. Twelfth International Conference on Logic Programming  Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Inductive Synthesis of Logic Programs by - Composition Of Combinatory (Correct)
....the semantical definition: foldr(P, Q) i=0 [ foldr i (P, Q) foldr 0 (P, Q) z##H #y, z##[ Q ] foldr i 1 (P, Q) t 1 2 ] w##H #z # H s.t. #y, t 2 ,z##[ foldr i (P, Q) ##t 1 ,z,w##[ P ] Similar recursion operators are proposed in [5] applying # Prolog, whereas our combinators are made available in ordinary logic programming as explained in the next section. For instance the relational append predicate definition in the formulation append ( X,X) append ( X T ] Y,Z)#append (T,Y,U) cons (X, U, Z) in the fold extended ....
Gegg-Harrison, T. S.: Representing Logic Program Schemata in #-Prolog. In L. Sterling (ed.) Procs. Twelfth International Conference on Logic Programming 1995, MIT Press, London, 1995. pp. 467--481.
Program Schemas as Steadfast Programs and their Usage in.. - Flener (1997) (Correct)
.... of that list into two shorter lists) Program schemas have been shown useful in a number of applications, such as proving properties of programs [26] teaching programming to novices [9] guiding the manual construction of programs [2, 32, 27] debugging programs [10] transforming programs [8, 11, 33], and guiding the (semi )automatic synthesis [4] of programs, be it deductive synthesis [1, 16, 18, 19, 30, 31] constructive synthesis [nobody so far] or inductive synthesis [5, 7, 14] For more details and more exhaustive references to related work, please refer to [6] For representing ....
....is not a mere juxtaposition, this is a first step towards going beyond programming in the small. Also, the schemas mentioned here are design schemas (capturing a class of programs) Since we do not discuss transformation schemas (directed pairs of design schemas capturing a transformation process [8, 11, 33]) here, we will from now on simply talk about schemas. 5.2 Steadfastness of a Divide and Conquer Template As we have observed earlier, the divide and conquer template above does not have a (formal) semantics by itself, so it is up to us to enforce that its extensions actually are programs of the ....
T.S. Gegg-Harrison. Representing logic program schemata in -Prolog. In L. Sterling, editor, Proc. ICLP'95 , pages 467--481. MIT Press, 1995.
Inductive Synthesis of Logic Programs by Composition of.. - Hamfelt, Nilsson (1998) (Correct)
No context found.
Gegg-Harrison, T. S.: Representing Logic Program Schemata in Prolog. In L. Sterling (ed.) Procs. Twelfth International Conference on Logic Programming
Generalized Generalization Generalizers (Extended Abstract) - Büyükyildiz, Flener (Correct)
No context found.
T.S. Gegg-Harrison. Representing logic program schemata in Prolog. In: L. Sterling (ed), Proc. of ICLP'95, pp. 467--481. The MIT Press, 1995.
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