Skip to main content

Imogen: Focusing the Polarized Inverse Method for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic

  • Conference paper
Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning (LPAR 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 5330))

Abstract

In this paper we describe Imogen, a theorem prover for intuitionistic propositional logic using the focused inverse method. We represent fine-grained control of the search behavior by polarizing the input formula. In manipulating the polarity of atoms and subformulas, we can often improve the search time by several orders of magnitude. We tested our method against seven other systems on the propositional fragment of the ILTP library. We found that our prover outperforms all other provers on a substantial subset of the library.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andreoli, J.-M.: Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 2(3), 297–347 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Andreoli, J.-M.: Focussing and proof construction. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 107(1–3), 131–163 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Avellone, A., Fiorino, G., Moscato, U.: A new O(n log n)-space decision procedure for propositional intuitionistic logic. In: Kurt Goedel Society Collegium Logicum, vol. VIII, pp. 17–33 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chaudhuri, K.: The Focused Inverse Method for Linear Logic. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Technical report CMU-CS-06-162 (December 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chaudhuri, K., Pfenning, F.: Focusing the inverse method for linear logic. In: Ong, L. (ed.) Computer Science Logic, pp. 200–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Chaudhuri, K., Pfenning, F., Price, G.: A logical characterization of forward and backward chaining in the inverse method. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS, vol. 4130, pp. 97–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Degtyarev, A., Voronkov, A.: The inverse method. In: Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 4, vol. I, pp. 179–272. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Dyckhoff, R.: Contraction-free sequent calculi for intuitionistic logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 57(3), 795–807 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Garg, D., Murphy, T., Price, G., Reed, J., Zeilberger, N.: Team red: The Sandstorm theorem prover, http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tom7/papers/

  10. Harper, R., Honsell, F., Plotkin, G.: A framework for defining logics. Journal of the ACM 40(1), 143–184 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Howe, J.M.: Proof Search Issues in Some Non-Classical Logics. PhD thesis, University of St. Andrews, Scotland (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lamarche, F.: Games semantics for full propositional linear logic. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 1995), San Diego, California, pp. 464–473. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1995)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Larchey-Wendling, D., Méry, D., Galmiche, D.: STRIP: Structural sharing for efficient proof-search. In: Goré, R.P., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) IJCAR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2083, pp. 670–674. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Liang, C., Miller, D.: Focusing and polarization in intuitionistic logic. In: Duparc, J., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CSL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4646, pp. 451–465. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Maslov, S.Y.: An inverse method for establishing deducibility in classical predicate calculus. Doklady Akademii nauk SSSR 159, 17–20 (1964)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. McCune, W.W.: OTTER 3.0 reference manual and guide. Technical Report ANL-94/6, Argonne National Laboratory/IL, USA (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pfenning, F., Schürmann, C.: System description: Twelf - A meta-logical framework for deductive systems. In: Ganzinger, H. (ed.) CADE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1632, pp. 202–206. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Raths, T., Otten, J.: The ILTP Library, http://www.iltp.de/

  19. Raths, T., Otten, J., Kreitz, C.: The ILTP problem library for intuitionistic logic. J. Autom. Reasoning 38(1-3), 261–271 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Sahlin, D., Franzén, T., Haridi, S.: An intuitionistic predicate logic theorem prover. Journal of Logic and Computation 2(5), 619–656 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Tammet, T.: A resolution theorem prover for intuitionistic logic. In: McRobbie, M.A., Slaney, J.K. (eds.) CADE 1996. LNCS, vol. 1104, pp. 2–16. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

McLaughlin, S., Pfenning, F. (2008). Imogen: Focusing the Polarized Inverse Method for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic. In: Cervesato, I., Veith, H., Voronkov, A. (eds) Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning. LPAR 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5330. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89439-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89439-1_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-89438-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-89439-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics