Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Automated Deduction in Gödel Logic

Published: 30 August 2018 Publication History

Abstract

This article addresses the deduction problem of a formula from a countable theory in the first-order Gödel logic. We generalise the well-known hyperresolution principle for deduction in Gödel logic. Our approach is based on translation of a formula to an equivalent satisfiable finite order clausal theory, consisting of order clauses. We introduce a notion of quantified atom: a formula a is a quantified atom if a = Qx, p(t0, …, tn), where Q is a quantifier (∀, ∃), p(t0, …, tn) is an atom, and x is a variable occurring in p(t0, …, tn); for all in, either ti = x or x does not occur in ti. Then an order clause is a finite set of order literals of the form ϵ1 ⋄ ϵ 2, where ϵi is either an atom, or a truth constant (0, 1), or a quantified atom, and ⋄ is either a connective ≖, equality, or ≺ strict order. ≖ and ≺ are interpreted by the equality and standard strict linear order on [0, 1], respectively. On the basis of the hyperresolution principle, a calculus operating over order clausal theories is devised. The calculus is proved to be refutation sound and complete for the countable case. As an interesting consequence, we get an affirmative solution to the open problem of recursive enumerability of unsatisfiable formulae in Gödel logic.

Supplementary Material

a18-guller-apndx.pdf (guller.zip)
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, Automated Deduction in Gödel Logic

References

[1]
Krzysztof R. Apt. 1988. Introduction to Logic Programming. Technical Report CS-R8826. Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
[2]
Matthias Baaz, Agata Ciabattoni, and Christian G. Fermüller. 2001. Herbrand’s theorem for prenex Gödel logic and its consequences for theorem proving. In Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning, 8th International Conference, LPAR 2001, Havana, Cuba, December 3-7, 2001, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Robert Nieuwenhuis and Andrei Voronkov (Eds.), Vol. 2250. Springer, 201--215.
[3]
Matthias Baaz, Agata Ciabattoni, and Christian G. Fermüller. 2012. Theorem proving for prenex Gödel logic with Delta: checking validity and unsatisfiability. Log. Meth. Comput. Sci. 8, 1 (2012).
[4]
Matthias Baaz and Christian G. Fermüller. 2010. A resolution mechanism for prenex Gödel logic. In Proceedings of the Computer Science Logic 24th International Workshop (CSL’10), 19th Annual Conference of the EACSL, Brno, Czech Republic, August 23-27, 2010. Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6247. Anuj Dawar and Helmut Veith (Eds.). Springer, 67--79.
[5]
Leo Bachmair and Harald Ganzinger. 1994. Rewrite-based equational theorem proving with selection and simplification. J. Log. Comput. 4, 3 (1994), 217--247.
[6]
Leo Bachmair and Harald Ganzinger. 1998. Ordered chaining calculi for first-order theories of transitive relations. J. ACM 45, 6 (1998), 1007--1049.
[7]
Armin Biere, Marijn J. H. Heule, Hans van Maaren, and Toby Walsh. 2009. Handbook of Satisfiability. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vol. 185. IOS Press, Amsterdam.
[8]
Martin Davis, George Logemann, and Donald Loveland. 1962. A machine program for theorem-proving. Commun. ACM 5, 7 (July 1962), 394--397.
[9]
Martin Davis and Hilary Putnam. 1960. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7, 3 (July 1960), 201--215.
[10]
Thierry Boy de la Tour. 1992. An optimality result for clause form translation. J. Symb. Comput. 14, 4 (1992), 283--302.
[11]
Dušan Guller. 2009. On the refutational completeness of signed binary resolution and hyperresolution. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 160, 8 (2009), 1162--1176.
[12]
Dušan Guller. 2010. A DPLL procedure for the propositional Gödel logic. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Fuzzy Computation and on Neural Computation, 2010 (ICFC-ICNC’10). SciTePress, 31--42.
[13]
Reiner Hähnle. 1994. Short conjunctive normal forms in finitely valued logics. J. Log. Comput. 4, 6 (1994), 905--927.
[14]
Andreas Nonnengart, Georg Rock, and Christoph Weidenbach. 1998. On generating small clause normal forms. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE’15), Lindau, Germany, July 5-10, 1998, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1421, Claude Kirchner and Hélène Kirchner (Eds.). Springer, 397--411.
[15]
David A. Plaisted and Steven Greenbaum. 1986. A structure-preserving clause form translation. J. Symb. Comput. 2, 3 (1986), 293--304.
[16]
J. A. Robinson. 1965. Automatic deduction with hyper-resolution. Internat. J. Comput. Math. 1, 3 (1965), 227--234.
[17]
J. A. Robinson. 1965. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. J. ACM 12, 1 (Jan. 1965), 23--41.
[18]
U. Schöning and J. Torán. 2013. The Satisfiability Problem: Algorithms and Analyses. Lehmanns Media.
[19]
Daniel Sheridan. 2004. The optimality of a fast CNF conversion and its use with SAT. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT'04). Vancouver, BC, Canada.
[20]
G. S. Tseitin. 1983. On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. In Automation of Reasoning 2: Classical Papers on Computational Logic 1967--1970, Jörg H. Siekmann and Graham Wrightson (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 466--483.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 19, Issue 3
July 2018
269 pages
ISSN:1529-3785
EISSN:1557-945X
DOI:10.1145/3274693
  • Editor:
  • Orna Kupferman
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 30 August 2018
Accepted: 01 May 2018
Revised: 01 May 2017
Received: 01 December 2014
Published in TOCL Volume 19, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Hyperresolution
  2. computational complexity
  3. many-valued logics

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 130
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 18 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media