Results 1 
5 of
5
Models and Emerging Trends of Concurrent Constraint Programming
, 2013
"... Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP) has been used over the last two decades as an elegant and expressive model for concurrent systems. It models systems of agents communicating by posting and querying partial information, represented as constraints over the variables of the system. This covers a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP) has been used over the last two decades as an elegant and expressive model for concurrent systems. It models systems of agents communicating by posting and querying partial information, represented as constraints over the variables of the system. This covers a vast variety of systems as those arising in biological phenomena, reactive systems, netcentric computing and the advent of social networks and cloud computing. In this paper we survey the main applications, developments and current trends of CCP.
Concurrent and Reactive Constraint Programming
, 2010
"... Abstract. The Italian Logic Programming community has given several contributions to the theory of Concurrent Constraint Programming. In particular, in the topics of semantics, verification, and timed extensions. In this paper we review the main lines of research and contributions of the community i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The Italian Logic Programming community has given several contributions to the theory of Concurrent Constraint Programming. In particular, in the topics of semantics, verification, and timed extensions. In this paper we review the main lines of research and contributions of the community in this field. 1 The origins: from concurrect logic programming to concurrent constraint programming In the 80’s there had been several proposals to extend logic programming with constructs for concurrency, aiming at the development of a concurrent language which would maintain the typical advantages of logic programming: declarative reading, computations as proofs, amenability to metaprogramming etc. Examples of concurrent logic languages include PARLOG [14], Concurrent Prolog [58, 59], Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) [61, 62] and their socalled flat versions. Towards the end of the decade, Concurrent constraint programming ([52, 56, 57]) emerged as one of the most successful proposals in this area.
Transformation Rules For A Higher Order Logic Programming Language
, 2000
"... We introduce a logic programming language with higher order features. In particular, in this language the arguments of the predicate symbols may be both terms and goals. We define the operational semantics of our language by extending SLDresolution, and we propose for this language a set of program ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We introduce a logic programming language with higher order features. In particular, in this language the arguments of the predicate symbols may be both terms and goals. We define the operational semantics of our language by extending SLDresolution, and we propose for this language a set of program transformation rules. The transformation rules are shown to be correct in the sense that they preserve the operational semantics. In our higher order logic language we may transform logic programs using higher order generalizations and continuation arguments, as it is done in the case of functional programs. These program transformation techniques allow us to derive very efficient logic programs and also to avoid goal rearrangements which may not preserve correctness.
Transformation Rules for Logic Programs with Goals as Arguments
 In Proceedings 9th International Workshop on Logicbased Program Synthesis and Transformation, LoPSTr '99
"... . We introduce a logic language where predicate symbols may have both terms and goals as arguments. We dene its operational semantics by extending SLDresolution with the leftmost selection rule, and we propose a set of transformation rules for manipulating programs written in that language. The ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. We introduce a logic language where predicate symbols may have both terms and goals as arguments. We dene its operational semantics by extending SLDresolution with the leftmost selection rule, and we propose a set of transformation rules for manipulating programs written in that language. These transformation rules are shown to be correct in the sense that they preserve the chosen operational semantics. This logic language has higher order capabilities which turn out to be very powerful for the derivation of ecient logic programs. In particular, in our language we can avoid the problem of goal rearrangement which is often encountered during program transformation. Moreover, goals as arguments allow us to perform on logic programs transformation steps similar to the ones performed on functional programs when using higher order generalizations and continuation arguments. 1 Introduction In the practice of logic programming the idea of having goals as arguments of predica...
Constraint Programs
"... Abstract We predict the maximal number of rule applications, i.e. worstcase derivation lengths of computations, in rulebased constraint solver programs written in the CHR language. CHR are a committedchoice concurrent constraint logic programming language consisting of multiheaded guarded rules. ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract We predict the maximal number of rule applications, i.e. worstcase derivation lengths of computations, in rulebased constraint solver programs written in the CHR language. CHR are a committedchoice concurrent constraint logic programming language consisting of multiheaded guarded rules. The derivation lengths are derived from rankings used in termination proofs for the respective programs. We are especially interested in rankings that give us a good upper bound, we call such rankings tight. Based on testruns with randomized data, we compare our predictions with empirical results by considering constraint solvers ranging from Boolean and terminological constraints to arcconsistency and pathconsistency.