Knowledge-based proof planning
Artificial Intelligence
Comparing approaches to the exploration of the domain of residue classes
Journal of Symbolic Computation - Integrated reasoning and algebra systems
Proof Planning with Multiple Strategies
CL '00 Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Logic
Employing Theory Formation to Guide Proof Planning
AISC '02/Calculemus '02 Proceedings of the Joint International Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, Automated Reasoning, and Symbolic Computation
CADE-18 Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction
The HR Program for Theorem Generation
CADE-18 Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction
The Use of Explicit Plans to Guide Inductive Proofs
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automated Deduction
System Description: Proof Planning in Higher-Order Logic with Lambda-Clam
CADE-15 Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automated Deduction: Automated Deduction
Failure Reasoning in Multiple-Strategy Proof Planning
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
PlatΩ: A Mediator between Text-Editors and Proof Assistance Systems
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
Proof planning with multiple strategies
Artificial Intelligence
Synthesizing proof planning methods and Ω-ants agents from mathematical knowledge
MKM'06 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Mathematical Knowledge Management
Impasse-driven reasoning in proof planning
MKM'05 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Mathematical Knowledge Management
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The CASC competitions among automated theorem provers show that there is no single system that outperforms all other systems in all domains. One reaction to this observation is the combination of several systems in a competitive (e.g., the SSCPA system) or cooperative manner (e.g., the CSSCPA and TECHS systems). Thereby, general-purpose heuristics select promising systems to be executed and promising intermediate results to be exchanged. Typically, exchanged results are restricted to clauses or equations that are accepted by all systems. The use of particular domain-specific services for particular subtasks such as the construction of mathematical objects and their flexible cooperation with other services guided by mathematically motivated control knowledge is not possible.