Automated generation of models and counterexamples and its application to open questions in Ternary Boolean algebra

Authors:
Steve Winker;L. Wos
Affiliations:
-;-
Venue:
MVL '78 Proceedings of the eighth international symposium on Multiple-valued logic
Year:
1978

Citing 2
Cited 6

The Concept of Demodulation in Theorem Proving

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving

Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving

Generation and Verification of Finite Models and Counterexamples Using an Automated Theorem Prover Answering Two Open Questions

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
The Automation of Proof: A Historical and Sociological Exploration

IEEE Annals of the History of Computing
Genetic Reasoning: Evolutionary Induction of Mathematical Proofs

Proceedings of the Second European Workshop on Genetic Programming
Position paper to be presented at "Verification workshop III (verkshop III)" to be held in Watsonville, CA. Feb. 18--21, 1985

ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes - Proceedings of VERkshop III -- a formal verification workshop
An automated reasoning system

AFIPS '81 Proceedings of the May 4-7, 1981, national computer conference
Automated reasoning: real uses and potential uses

IJCAI'83 Proceedings of the Eighth international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.01

Visualization

Abstract

The thrust of this paper is: first, to answer certain previously unanswered questions in the field of Ternary Boolean algebra; second, to describe the method, utilizing an automated theorem-proving program as an invaluable aid, by which these answers were obtained; and third, to informally give the characteristics of those problems to which the method can be successfully applied. The approach under study begins with known facts in the form of axioms and lemmas of the field being investigated, finds by means of certain specified inference rules new facts, and continues to reason from the expanding set of facts until the problem at hand is solved or the procedure is interrupted. The solution often takes the form of a finite model or of a counterexample to the underlying conjecture. The model and/or counterexample is generated with the aid of an already existing automated theorem-proving procedure and without any recourse to any additional programming.