| K. R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for firstorder built-in's in prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4):159--191, 1994. |
....is partially normalised if all the rules in P are partially normalised. After integer argument positions are identified a program can be easily rewritten to partially normalised form. Now we are ready to present the transformation formally. 2 If such a rule has only integer arguments Apt et al. [2] call it homogeneous. Definition 11. Let P be a program and let p be a predicate in it. Let A = S q2P A q be a set of possible adornments for P . Then, the program P a , called adorned with respect to p, is obtained in two steps as following: 1. For every rule r in P , for every subgoal q(t 1 ....
....and (n 1 ; m) n 2 , if n 1 N n 2 and N is the usual order on the naturals. 2 This integrated approach allows one to analyse correctly examples such as ground, unify, numbervars [15] and Example 6. 12 in [8] 6 Conclusion Termination of numerical computations was studied by a number of authors [1, 2, 8]. Apt et al. 2] provided a declarative semantics, so called Theta semantics, for Prolog programs with first order built in predicates, including arithmetic operations. In this framework the property of strong termination, i.e. finiteness of all LD trees for all possible goals, was completely ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
K. R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for firstorder built-in's in prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4):159--191, 1994.
....given. The solution in Prolog presented here was found independently by Apt and Bezem [AB91] Elkan [Elk89] and Evans [Eva89] where its declarative and procedural interpretation were also studied. Summary 317 The formal aspects of the term inspection facilities have been considered in Apt et al. AMP94] where procedural and declarative interpretation of logic programs with arithmetic and the term inspection facilities has been proposed. This declarative interpretation has been used there to prove universal termination of the programs LIST1 and UNIFICATION for all queries. Finally, the program ....
K. R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for firstorder built-in's of Prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4):159--191, 1994.
....behaviour of clp s is more subtle than that of logic programs. For instance, the presence of some constraints can turn an execution into a (finite) failure, because the actual state does not satisfy a constraint. A similar behaviour can be observed in some built in s of Prolog (see e.g. [AMP94]) Moreover, in most CLP systems, the state is divided into two components containing the so called active and passive constraint, and only the consistency of the active constraint is checked. Then the fact that satisfiability of passive constraints is not checked, affects the termination ....
K.R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for first-order built-in's of Prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4), pp. 159-191, 1994.
....Tuple) Consider a goal A;B. Then j is a c.a.s. of P [ f A;Bg iff for some and oe ffl is a c.a.s. of P [ f Ag, ffl oe is a c.a.s. of P [ f B g, ffl j = oe) j (A; B) ffl (A; B; oe) is a good tuple. Proof. The proof is lengthy and tedious and can be found in the technical report [4]. 2 This lemma shows that the c.a.s. s for a compound goal A;B cannot be obtained by simply composing each c.a.s. for A with each c.a.s. oe for B . The notion of a good tuple formalizes the conditions that and oe have to satisfy, due to the standardization apart. Both conditions of ....
....P . 2 We now show that a Prolog program P and its homogeneous form Hom(P ) have the same computational behaviour. Theorem 2.26 (Equivalence I) Let P be a Prolog program, G a goal. Then P [ fGg has a refutation with c.a.s. j if and only if Hom(P ) fGg has a refutation with c.a.s. j. Proof. See [4]. 2 Theorem 2.26 allows to reason about the meaning of Prolog programs by transforming them first to a homogeneous form. Alternatively, we can extend the definition of the truth to arbitrary programs by simply defining a clause to be true iff its homogeneous version is true. By processing then ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Apt K. R., Marchiori E., Palamidessi C.: A declarative approach for first-order built-in's of Prolog. Tech. Rep. CS-R9246. CWI, Amsterdam, NL (1992).
No context found.
K. R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for firstorder built-in's in prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4):159--191, 1994.
No context found.
K. R. Apt, E. Marchiori, and C. Palamidessi. A declarative approach for firstorder built-in's of Prolog. Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computation, 5(3/4):159--191, 1994.
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