Titlebook: Automation of Reasoning; 2: Classical Papers J?rg H. Siekmann,Graham Wrightson Book 1983 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1983 Automation

poliosis

altruism

Automatic Theorem Proving With Renamable and Semantic Resolutionis a ground model, then there exists an unresolved maximal semantic clash..,.., ..., ..,. with nucleus . such that any set containing . and one or more of the electrons E., E., ..., Eq is an unresolved semantic clash in .

dry-eye

令人不快

Mechanical Theorem-Proving by Model Eliminationl only candidates already “partially contradictory.” The major task usually is finding the partially contradictory sets. However, the number of candidate sets required to find these subsets of the contradictory set is generally much smaller than the number required to find the full contradictory set

intrude

athlete’s-foot

A Cancellation Algorithm for Elementary Logic applied to formulae of certain types and so, as was to be expected, it cannot in general be relied upon to show something not to be a logical truth when in fact it is not one. But when the method is applied to a formula expressing a logical truth, the method will eventually show it to be such, and

Impugn

An Inverse Method for Establishing Deducibility of Nonprenex Formulas of the Predicate Calculusthod is profitable for constructing mechanical proof search algorithms, but a variant of a method described in [1] is applicable only for disjunctions of prenexed formulas whose matrices are in conjunctive normal form. In general putting a formula . in prenex form .’ and then finding a deduction of

迷住

Automatic Theorem Proving With Renamable and Semantic Resolutioncomputer program based on the new theory is proposed and the proposed semantic resolution program is compared with hyper-resolution and set-of-support resolution programs. Renamable and semantic resolution are defined and shown to be identical. Given a model ., semantic resolution is the resolution

pineal-gland

The Concept of Demodulation in Theorem Proving it is easy to prove that in groups (x .).= x and that in rings -x?-y = x ?y. In the presence of such an equality, each new inference made during a proof search by a theorem-proving program may immediately yield a set of very closely related inferences. If, for example, b ?a = . is inferred in the p

CAJ

Resolution with Mergingnd . merge together to form some literal of . It is shown that the resolution method remains complete if it is required that two noninitial clauses which are not merges never be resolved with one another. It is also shown that this strategy can be combined with the set-of-support strategy.