Partial deduction of the ground representation and its application to integrity checking
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The difference in speed between the non-ground and ground representations currently reaches several orders of magnitude.
“This (currently) induces a difference in speed reaching several orders of magnitude”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [56]
The difference in speed between the non-ground and ground representations can pose subtle problems for specialisation.
“and can pose some subtle problems for specialisation [56,51]”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [56]
Collecting all solutions and performing subsumption tests to keep only the most general ones can only be done declaratively in the ground representation.
“The latter can only be done declaratively in the ground representation [55,56]”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [56]
Performing subsumption tests in an integrity checker that includes instantiation of goals leads either to the use of the ground representation, which has associated problems in efficiency and specialisation, or to the use of non-declarative features, which are difficult to partially evaluate and will probably result in little specialisation given existing techniques.
“or perform subsumption tests, in turn leading to”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [56]
No meta-interpreter using the full ground representation with explicit unification has been made to completely remove the overhead via partial evaluation.
“Performing a similar feat on a meta-interpreter using the full ground representation with explicit unification is much harder and has, to the best of our knowledge, not been accomplished yet”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [56]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters
Leuschel, M., & De Schreye, D. (1998) · The Journal of Logic Programming · doi:10.1016/s0743-1066(97)10012-7 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Efficiently generating efficient generating extensions in prolog
Jørgensen, J., & Leuschel, M. (1996) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-61580-6_12 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Venue
- Logic Programming
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 1995
- OpenAlex
- W1519601538
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.87
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The MIT Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, programming, and type systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Keywords
- partial deduction, integrity verification, program analysis
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
