CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 40Logic, programming, and type systemsAdvanced Algebra and LogicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Narrowing-driven partial evaluation of functional logic programs

Open access
Alpuente, M., Falaschi, M., Vidal, G.·1996·Lecture Notes in Computer Science
DOI 10.1007/3-540-61055-3_28
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/3-540-61055-3_28

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Partial evaluation of functional-logic programs already features the use of homeomorphic embedding and m-trees.

    “Indeed, partial evaluation of functional-logic programs [Alpuente et al. 1996;1997;Lafave and Gallagher 1997] already features the use of homeomorphic embedding and m-trees [Martens and Gallagher 1995].”

    From Controlling generalization and polyvariance in partial deduction of normal logic programs (1998) · cites this paper as Alpuente et al. 1996

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. J. Darlington and H. Pull. A Program Development Methodology Based on a Unified Approach to Execution and Transformation. In D. Bjørner, A.P. Ershov, and N.D. Jones, editors, Proc. of the Int'l Workshop on Partial Evaluation and Mixed Computation, pages 117–131. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988.
  2. Y. Futamura. Partial Evaluation of Computation Process — An Approach to a Compiler-Compiler. Systems, Computers, Controls, 2(5):45–50, 1971.
  3. M.H. Sørensen and R. Glück. Generalization in Positive Supercompilation. In J.W. Lloyd, editor, Proc. of ILPS'95, 1995.
  4. V.F. Turchin. The Algorithm of Generalization in the Supercompiler. In D. Bjørner, A.P. Ershov, and N.D. Jones, editors, Proc. of the Int'l Workshop on Partial Evaluation and Mixed Computation, pages 531–549. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Alpuente, M., Falaschi, M., & Vidal, G.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Politècnica de València (ES)
  • University of Udine (IT)
ORCID
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published
1996
Pages
45-61
ISSN
  • 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-3349
DOI
10.1007/3-540-61055-3_28
OpenAlex
W1574340008
Cited by
40
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.84
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
  • Use Siena air (University of Siena) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Logic, programming, and type systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Algebra and Logic
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Keywords
narrowing, functional logic programming, partial evaluation, program transformation, termination, soundness and completeness, supercompilation, operational semantics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review