LARA

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Next revision Both sides next revision
sav08:instantiation_plus_ground_resolution [2008/04/01 18:19]
vkuncak
sav08:instantiation_plus_ground_resolution [2009/05/14 11:57]
vkuncak
Line 1: Line 1:
-====== ​Gdound ​Instantiation plus Ground Resolution as a Proof System ======+====== ​Ground ​Instantiation plus Ground Resolution as a Proof System ======
  
 We introduce this proof system as an intermediate step between the naive enumeration algorithm based on Herbrand'​s theorem and resolution for first-order logic. We introduce this proof system as an intermediate step between the naive enumeration algorithm based on Herbrand'​s theorem and resolution for first-order logic.
Line 29: Line 29:
  
 ==== Example ==== ==== Example ====
 +
  
 ===== Completeness ===== ===== Completeness =====
Line 34: Line 35:
 The proof is based on [[Herbrand'​s Expansion Theorem]] (see also the proof of [[Compactness for First-Order Logic]]). The proof is based on [[Herbrand'​s Expansion Theorem]] (see also the proof of [[Compactness for First-Order Logic]]).
  
-Suppose a set $S$ of clauses is contradictory. ​ By [[Herbrand'​s Expansion Theorem]] and [[Compactness Theorem|Compactness Theorem for Propositional Formulas]], there is some finite subset $S_0 \subseteq expand(S)$ is contradictory. ​ Then there exists a derivation of empty clause from $S_0$ viewed as set of propositional formulas, using propositional resolution. ​ In other words, there exists a derivation of empty clause from $S_0$ using ground resolution rule.  Each element of $S_0$ can be obtained from an element of $S$ using instantiation rule.  This means that there exists a proof tree that starts ​by a single application of instantiation rule, and then performs ​ground resolution.+Suppose a set $S$ of clauses is contradictory. ​ By [[Herbrand'​s Expansion Theorem]] and [[Compactness Theorem|Compactness Theorem for Propositional Formulas]], there is some finite subset $S_0 \subseteq expand(S)$ is contradictory. ​ Then there exists a derivation of empty clause from $S_0$ viewed as set of propositional formulas, using propositional resolution. ​ In other words, there exists a derivation of empty clause from $S_0$ using ground resolution rule.  Each element of $S_0$ can be obtained from an element of $S$ using instantiation rule.  This means that there exists a proof tree whose leaves are followed ​by a single application of instantiation rule, and inner nodes contain ​ground resolution ​steps.