J.-M. Jacquet and L. Monteiro. Communicating Clauses: the Framework and its Semantics. In K.R. Apt, editor, Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, Series in Logic Programming, pages 98-- 112, Washington, USA, November 1992. The MIT Press.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... Log based languages, among others because of the mechanism of competing activation patterns. There is also no provision to define relations between blackboards in Shared Prolog. Other languages similar in spirit to the blackboard relations in Log include Gamma [2] LO [1] Communicating Clauses [16], and the mechanism proposed in [3] All of them transform in one way or another a multiset of elements into another one. Rephrased in terms of our framework, they basically consist of taking active processes and passive data and of putting other processes and data as a result. LO has moreover ....

J.-M. Jacquet and L. Monteiro. Communicating Clauses: the Framework and its Semantics. In K.R. Apt, editor, Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, Series in Logic Programming, pages 98-- 112, Washington, USA, November 1992. The MIT Press.

....between concurrent logic processes and is accessed by means of Linda like primitives putting, testing and removing both passive data structures and active processes from it. Finally, to conclude this non exhaustive list of examples, the synchronous communication mechanism introduced in [1, 5, 15, 16] can also be viewed as another instance of this general resource based scheme. There, processes are simultaneously reduced to others and thus act as resources for their synchronizing partners. Although resources thus appear to be central, most of the above mentioned logic languages have handled ....

.... connector and provide semantics for both its sequential and parallel versions. As noted in [8] finding a way to represent parallel and non deterministic actions is a real challenge, to which we believe to have given a solution. Finally, this paper grew up as a continuation of our previous work [15, 16] and its related work [5, 9] As already suggested, one difference with this work is the clear separation between resource handling and logical treatment. As an interesting consequence, resource need not be considered as active data when they are not actually. Compare for instance the stack ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

J.-M. Jacquet and L. Monteiro. Communicating Clauses: the Framework and its Semantics. In K.R. Apt, editor, Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, Series in Logic Programming, pages 98--112, Washington, USA, November 1992. The MIT Press.

....completion. Section 5 presents the operational semantics O d . Section 6 discusses the declarative models Decl m and Decl f and connects them with the operational semantics O d . Lack of space prevents us from giving proofs. Nevertherless, all the propositions stated hereafter have been proved in [11]. Finally, section 7 sums up the relationships established in the paper and gives our conclusions. 2 Examples 2.1 Producer consumer schemes As a first example of the expressiveness power of communicating clauses, let us simulate, by using them, the following producer prod and consumer cons, ....

J.-M. Jacquet and L. Monteiro. Communicating Clauses: the Framework and its Semantics. to appear as Research Report, Department of Computer Science, University of Namur, Belgium and Technical Report, UNINOVA, Lisbon, Portugal.

....between concurrent logic processes and is accessed by means of Linda like primitives putting, testing and removing both passive data structures and active processes from it. Finally, to conclude this non exhaustive list of examples, the synchronous communication mechanism introduced in [5, 1, 15, 16] can also be viewed as another instance of this general resource based scheme. There, processes are simultaneously reduced to others and thus act as resources for their synchronizing partners. Although resources thus appear to be central, most of the above mentioned logic languages have handled ....

.... connector and provide semantics for both its sequential and parallel versions. As noted in [8] finding a way to represent parallel and non deterministic actions is a real challenge, to which we believe to have given a solution. Finally, this paper grew up as a continuation of our previous work [15, 16] and its related work [9, 5] As already suggested, one difference with this work is the clear separation between resource handling and logical treatment. As an interesting consequence, resource need not be considered as active data when they are not actually. Compare for instance the stack ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

J.-M. Jacquet and L. Monteiro. Communicating Clauses: the Framework and its Semantics. In K.R. Apt, editor, Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, Series in Logic Programming, pages 98--112, Washington, USA, November 1992. The MIT Press.

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