Search

Generally, the negation-limited inverters problem is a puzzle of constructing an inverter with AND gates and OR gates, and a few inverters. This paper introduces a curious new result about the effectiveness of two powerful ATP (Automated Theorem Proving) strategies in tackling negation-limited inverter problems. Two resolution strategies are UR (Unit Resulting) resolution and Hyper-Resolution. In the experiment, we cope with two kinds of automated circuit construction: three input/output inverters and four input/output BCD Counter Circuit. Both circuits are constructed with a few limited inverters. Curiously, it has been turned out that UR resolution is drastically faster than Hyper-Resolution in the measurement of the size of SoS (Set of Support). Besides, we discuss the syntactic and semantic criteria, which might cause a considerable difference in computation cost between UR resolution and Hyper-Resolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a tribute to the scientific legacy of automated reasoning pioneer and JAR founder Lawrence T. (Larry) Wos. Larry's main technical contributions were the set-of-support strategy for resolution theorem proving, and the demodulation and paramodulation inference rules for building equality into resolution. Starting from the original definitions of these concepts in Larry's papers, this survey traces their evolution, unearthing the often forgotten trails that connect Larry's original definitions to those that became standard in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shortly before Larry Wos passed away, he sent a manuscript for discussion to Sophie Tourret, the editor of the AAR newsletter. We present excerpts from this final manuscript, put it in its historic context and explain its relevance for today's research in automated reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]