K. Clark, and S. Gregory, "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 1--49, 1986.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....generated by the corresponding goals. So, parallel logic programming is sometimes the only possibility to deal with the complexity of some artificial intelligence problems and on the other hand can be an adequate solution for many significant run time optimizations even for the actual solutions [2, 4, 6, 10]. Parallelizing compilers try to automatically and e#ciently exploit the parallelism available in a given program, transforming the programs into their parallel Received by the editors: January 15, 2003. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 68M20, 68N17, 68Q10. 1998 CR Categories and ....

K.L. Clark, S. Gregory, PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic, in A.C.M. TOPLAS, Vol. 8, No.1, Jan. 1986.

....logic programming over the last ten years. One emerged from the process interpretation of logic programs introduced in the late 1970s [12] and led to the design and (possibly parallel) implementation of a variety of concurrent logic programming languages amenable to process interpretation [4] 34][5][37] These languages aim at the description of systems of processes and not directly at the description of search problems. Control is an integral part of the languages, and users program concurrent execution. The other direction aims at the parallel execution of pure logic or Prolog programs ....

....logic programming for the first time. This made Relational Language capable of describing don t care nondeterministic processes. The subsequent concurrent logic languages attempted to refine existing ones or to enhance their expressive power. These languages include Concurrent Prolog [34] PARLOG [5], Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) 37] 38] Flat Concurrent Prolog [35] and Oc [18] A survey and a genealogy of these languages can be found in [36] and [31] respectively. Here, we introduce GHC without guard goals as a process description language. This subset of GHC is essentially equivalent to ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S. PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM. Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1--49.

....they possibly can. Concurrent logic programming was born in early 1980 s from the process interpretation of logic programs [34] Relational Language [7] the first concrete proposal of a concurrent logic language, was followed by a succession of proposals, namely Concurrent Prolog [20] PARLOG [8] and Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) 27] KL1 [29] the Kernel Language of the Fifth Generation Computer Systems (FGCS) project [22] was designed based on GHC by featuring (among others) mapping constructs for concurrent processes. To be precise, KL1 is based on Flat GHC [28] a subset of GHC that ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM. Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1--49.

....recognized as it used to be, Concurrent Prolog [30] designed in early 1980s was the first simple high level language that featured channel mobility in the sense of the # calculus. When the author proposed Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) 36] 37] as a simplification of Concurrent Prolog and PARLOG [8], the principal design constraint was to retain channel mobility and evolving process structures [32] because GHC was supposed to be the basis of KL1 [39] a language in which to describe operating systems of the Parallel Inference Machines as well as various knowledge based systems. 4. ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM. Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1--49.

....right. Relational Language [3] was the first to appear in the form of a complete programming language. Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) was designed in the Fifth Generation Computer Project in 1984 [11] after thorough examination of its predecessors Concurrent Prolog [9] and an early version of PARLOG [4]. Because of its simplicity, GHC was soon accepted in the Project as the base of KL1, the full fledged kernel language for the Parallel Inference Machine. GHC was soon subsetted to Flat GHC with a simpler guard construct, and the design of KL1 started based on Flat GHC. While GHC was designed as a ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM. Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1--49.

....on them, and this is just what we intend to express in GHC. In this sense, GHC could be viewed as a realization of Kowalski s thesis algorithm = logic control [4] There may be various ways to achieve our purposes and to obtain a parallel programming language. Concurrent Prolog [6] PARLOG [2] and GHC share the above design goals in principle, and they all have guard as a syntactic construct. The unique feature of GHC is that it uses guard as the only syntactic construct, as we will describe below. 3. Syntax and Semantics 3.1. Syntax A GHC program is a set of guarded Horn clauses of ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1-49.

....languages. The purpose of our mode system is to infer which goal will determine which part of a data structure, if each part is to be determined at all, rather than to infer the instantiation states of the arguments of goals as in [4] The mode system is very different also from that of PARLOG [2] and of DEC 10 Prolog [5] as will be discussed in Section 2.7. Because our mode system is intended for static analysis, it is impossible to analyze the dataflow of all meaningful Flat GHC programs. We chose to assume that programmers obey the following conventions: 1) Interprocess ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM. Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., Vol. 8, No. 1 (1986), pp. 1--49.

....debugging, maintenance and complexity measurement of concurrent logic programs. 1 Introduction Concurrent logic programming is a new field of concurrent programming, where logic programming, process oriented programming, and concurrent objectoriented programming all meet and fuse together [1, 5, 11, 13]. It is powerful so that many important programming paradigms such as object oriented programming and stream communication can be subsumed. For example, as one of the prominent features of concurrent logic programming languages, they allow us to describe interprocess communication with complicated ....

....the end of the a module, it uses database write processors to write analysis information collected for that procedure to the database. Although here we use KL1 as our target language, we also consider to use Kparser technology to handle other Flat languages such as FCP [11] and Flat Parlog [1] to obtain analysis information for programs written in such languages. 3.2 Analysis Information Database CLPKIDS collects program analysis data from parsers, net generators, analysis tools and software engineering tools, and stores the data in a database. In designing our database, we have two ....

K. Clark and S. Gregory, "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic," ACM Transaction on Programming Language and System, Vol.8, No.1, pp.149, 1986.

....never flow out. The Scheduling building block has two input ports, but other building blocks have one input port in Fig. 2. This architecture can be properly represented by using a backward chaining predicate logic based language similar to GHC [Ued 85] Concurrent Prolog [Sha 86] or Parlog [Cla 86] These languages are suited to describing data stream processing. So the pipe connection models can be expressed directly. A language for this architecture, which is called SNAP (Structured Network programming by And Parallel language) was defined by Kanada [Kan 00b] In SNAP, each building ....

Clark, K., and Gregory, S.: PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic, ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems,Vol.8,No.1, pp. 1--49, 1986.

....As the calculus is a model of concurrent computation, the approaches of this paper can be extended to specify the semantics of the family of concurrent logic programming languages. As a sequel, some results have been achieved in specifying the flat versions of these languages, such as Flat Parlog[CG86] and Flat GHC[Ued86, Sha89] which do not require multi environment for committed or parallelism and whose unifications are eventual in the sense that no backtracking is required. The andparallelism is modeled by using the calculus concurrent composition (j) processes. The committed ....

K.L. Clark and S. Gregory. Parlog: Parallel programming in logic. ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., 8(1):1--49, January 1986.

....order. If the result depends on the actual order of execution, such as when Prolog s meta logical facilities are used, then the result is not well defined. The some order semantics would be the natural choice for languages with a concurrent computation rule, such as Godel [23] Parlog [14] and various constraint languages. Notice that when all body instances are independent, all semantics above are equivalent. The condition of independence is trivially satisfied if the subexpressions do not share any variables (in the terminology of Hermengildo and Rossi [22] this is strict ....

Clark, K. L. and Gregory, S., PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic, Technical Report DOC 84/4, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, London, Apr. 1984. 38

....y Author s address: Department of Computer Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND. Email:cleary waikato.ac.nz 1 channels between processes (goals) All goals even those with variables in common may execute concurrently. Languages in this class include PARLOG [Clark Gregory 1986], Concurrent Prolog [Shapiro 1987] and GHC [Ueda 1987] and their flat versions; newer languages like Strand [Foster Taylor 1990] have recently come on the scene as well. Finally, the backtracking stream AND parallel models feature both parallel execution of dependent and independent goals ....

K.L. Clark and S. Gregory. PARLOG: parallel programming in logic, ACM TOPLAS, 8(1):1--49, 1986.

....common to many processes. This metainterpreter waits for a failure to occur, and if failure never occurs it will wait forever. 4. 2 Parlog In a Parlog program each predicate is associated with a mode declaration , i.e. a set of annotations that define the I O behaviour of the predicate arguments [5]: this settles the main syntactic difference with respect to FCP. A variable annotated with a is an input variable, a variable annotated with a is an output variable. Parlog is implemented by compilation in a simpler language, Kernel Parlog. The main difference between Parlog and its ....

Clark, K.L., and Gregory, S. Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic. ACM TOPLAS, 8:1, 1986, 1-49 (also Ch.3 in [22]).

....can be used to validate the coordination protocols that must be enacted by the environment. An approach that is both declarative and operational to specify software architectures and systems is based on parallel logic languages, like Flat Concurrent Prolog (FCP) Shapiro 89] Parlog [Clark 86] and Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) Ueda 85] These languages are very similar, since they have a common syntax and provide the same high level mechanisms such as unification, inference, and nondeterminism. More important from a specifier s point of view [Wing 90] their formal semantics has been ....

K.L.Clark, S.Gregory, "Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM TOPLAS, 8:1, 1986, 1-49.

.... communication scheme for messages including Typed Feature Structures (TFSs) Carpenter, 1992) ffl Efficient treatment of TFSs by an abstract machine (Makino et al. 1998) Another possible way to develop parallel NLP systems with TFSs is to use a full concurrent logic programming language (Clark and Gregory, 1986; Ueda, 1985) However, we have observed that it is necessary to control parallelism in a flexible way to achieve high performance. Fixed concurrency in a logic programming language does not provide sufficient flexibility. Our agent based architecture is suitable for accomplishing such ....

K. Clark and S. Gregory. 1986. Parlog: Parallel programming in logic. Journal of the ACM Transaction on Programming Languages and Systems, 8(1):1--49.

No context found.

K. Clark, and S. Gregory, "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 1--49, 1986.

No context found.

Clark, K.L. and Gregory, S. 1986. \Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM Trans. Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.1-49.

No context found.

Keith Clark and Steve Gregory. Parlog: Parallel programming in logic. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 8(1):1--49, 1986.

No context found.

K. Clark and S. Gregory, "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic," ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 8, 1 (Jan. 1986), pp. 1-49.

No context found.

Clark, K. and Gregory, S., "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 1--49, 1986.

No context found.

Clark, K., Gregory, S. (1986) PARLOG: parallel programming in logic, ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., vol 8, no. 1, pp. 1--49.

No context found.

Clark, K.L. and Gregory, S. 1986. \Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic", ACM Trans. Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.1-49.

No context found.

Clark, K. and Gregory, S. (1986). PARLOG: parallel programming in logic. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 8(1):1--49.

No context found.

K. L. Clark and S. Gregory, `Parlog: parallel programming in logic', ACM TOPLAS, 8, (1), 1--49 (1986).

No context found.

K.L. Clark and S. Gregory, "PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic," ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and System,, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1986, pp i-49.

First 50 documents  Next 50

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