Termination Proofs for Logic Programs with Tabling

Tabled logic programming is receiving increasing attention in the Logic Programming community. It avoids many of the shortcomings of SLD execution and provides a more flexible and often extremely efficient execution mechanism for logic programs. In particular, tabled execution of logic programs terminates more often than execution based on SLD-resolution. In this article, we introduce two notions of universal termination of logic programming with Tabling: quasi-termination and (the stronger notion of) LG-termination. We present sufficient conditions for these two notions of termination, namely quasi-acceptability and LG-acceptability, and we show that these conditions are also necessary in case the tabling is well-chosen. Starting from these conditions, we give modular termination proofs, i.e., proofs capable of combining termination proofs of separate programs to obtain termination proofs of combined programs. Finally, in the presence of mode information, we state sufficient conditions which form the basis for automatically proving termination in a constraint-based way.Comment: 48 pages, 6 figures, submitted to ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL

Classes of Terminating Logic Programs

Termination of logic programs depends critically on the selection rule, i.e. the rule that determines which atom is selected in each resolution step. In this article, we classify programs (and queries) according to the selection rules for which they terminate. This is a survey and unified view on different approaches in the literature. For each class, we present a sufficient, for most classes even necessary, criterion for determining that a program is in that class. We study six classes: a program strongly terminates if it terminates for all selection rules; a program input terminates if it terminates for selection rules which only select atoms that are sufficiently instantiated in their input positions, so that these arguments do not get instantiated any further by the unification; a program local delay terminates if it terminates for local selection rules which only select atoms that are bounded w.r.t. an appropriate level mapping; a program left-terminates if it terminates for the usual left-to-right selection rule; a program exists-terminates if there exists a selection rule for which it terminates; finally, a program has bounded nondeterminism if it only has finitely many refutations. We propose a semantics-preserving transformation from programs with bounded nondeterminism into strongly terminating programs. Moreover, by unifying different formalisms and making appropriate assumptions, we are able to establish a formal hierarchy between the different classes.Comment: 50 pages. The following mistake was corrected: In figure 5, the first clause for insert was insert([],X,[X]

An overview of the ciao multiparadigm language and program development environment and its design philosophy

We describe some of the novel aspects and motivations behind the design and implementation of the Ciao multiparadigm programming system. An important aspect of Ciao is that it provides the programmer with a large number of useful features from different programming paradigms and styles, and that the use of each of these features can be turned on and off at will for each program module. Thus, a given module may be using e.g. higher order functions and constraints, while another module may be using objects, predicates, and concurrency. Furthermore, the language is designed to be extensible in a simple and modular way. Another important aspect of Ciao is its programming environment, which provides a powerful preprocessor (with an associated assertion language) capable of statically finding non-trivial bugs, verifying that programs comply with specifications, and performing many types of program optimizations. Such optimizations produce code that is highly competitive with other dynamic languages or, when the highest levéis of optimization are used, even that of static languages, all while retaining the interactive development environment of a dynamic language. The environment also includes a powerful auto-documenter. The paper provides an informal overview of the language and program development environment. It aims at illustrating the design philosophy rather than at being exhaustive, which would be impossible in the format of a paper, pointing instead to the existing literature on the system

An overview of ciao and its design philosophy

We provide an overall description of the Ciao multiparadigm programming system emphasizing some of the novel aspects and motivations behind its design and implementation. An important aspect of Ciao is that, in addition to supporting logic programming (and, in particular, Prolog), it provides the programmer with a large number of useful features from different programming paradigms and styles and that the use of each of these features (including those of Prolog) can be turned on and off at will for each program module. Thus, a given module may be using, e.g., higher order functions and constraints, while another module may be using assignment, predicates, Prolog meta-programming, and concurrency. Furthermore, the language is designed to be extensible in a simple and modular way. Another important aspect of Ciao is its programming environment, which provides a powerful preprocessor (with an associated assertion language) capable of statically finding non-trivial bugs, verifying that programs comply with specifications, and performing many types of optimizations (including automatic parallelization). Such optimizations produce code that is highly competitive with other dynamic languages or, with the (experimental) optimizing compiler, even that of static languages, all while retaining the flexibility and interactive development of a dynamic language. This compilation architecture supports modularity and separate compilation throughout. The environment also includes a powerful autodocumenter and a unit testing framework, both closely integrated with the assertion system. The paper provides an informal overview of the language and program development environment. It aims at illustrating the design philosophy rather than at being exhaustive, which would be impossible in a single journal paper, pointing instead to previous Ciao literature

An overview of Ciao and its design philosophy

We provide an overall description of the Ciao multiparadigm programming sy stem emphasizing some of the novel aspects and motivations behind its design and implementation. An important aspect of Ciao is that, in addition to supporting logic programming (and, in particular, Prolog), it provides the programmer with a large number of useful features from different programming paradigms and styles, and that the use of each of these features (including those of Prolog) can be turned on and off at will for each program module. Thus, a given module may be using, e.g., higher order functions and constraints, while another module may be using assignment, predicates, Prolog meta-programming, and concurrency. Furthermore, the language is designed to be extensible in a simple and modular way. Another important aspect of Ciao is its programming environment, which provides a powerful preprocessor (with an associated assertion language) capable of statically flnding non-trivial bugs, verifying that programs comply with speciflcations, and performing many types of optimizations (including automatic parallelization). Such optimizations produce code that is highly competitive with other dynamic languages or, with the (experimental) optimizing compiler, even that of static languages, all while retaining the flexibility and interactive development of a dynamic language. This compilation architecture supports modularity and sepárate compilation throughout. The environment also includes a powerful auto-documenter and a unit testing framework, both closely integrated with the assertion system. The paper provides an informal overview of the language and program development environment. It aims at illustrating the design philosophy rather than at being exhaustive, which would be impossible in a single journal paper, pointing instead to previous Ciao literature

Termination of simply-moded well-typed logic programs under a tabled execution mechanism

Tabled logic programming is receiving increasing attention in the Logic Programming community. It avoids many of the shortcomings of SLD(NF) execution and provides a more flexible and often extremely efficient execution mechanism for logic programs. In particular, tabled execution of logic programs terminates more often than execution based on SLD-resolution. So, if a program can be proven to terminate under SLD-resolution, then the program will trivially also terminate under SLG-resolution, the resolution principle of tabling. But, since there are SLG-terminating programs which are not SLD-terminating, more effective proof techniques can be found. One of the few approaches studying termination of tabled logic programs was developed by Decorte et al. They present necessary and sufficient conditions for two notions of termination under LG-resolution, i.e. SLG-resolution with left-to-right selection rule: quasi-termination and (the stronger notion of) LG-termination. Starting from these necessary and sufficient conditions, we introduce sufficient conditions for quasi-termination and LG-termination which are stated fully at the clause level and are easy to automatize. To this end, we use mode and type information: we consider simply-moded, well-typed programs and queries. We point out how our termination conditions can be automatized, by extending the recently developed, constraint-based, automatic termination analysis for SLD-resolution of Decorte and De Schreye. Finally, we present a result on substitution-closedness of quasi-termination and LG-termination for the class of simply-moded, well-typed programs and queries.status: publishe

Language Interoperability and Logic Programming Languages

We discuss P#, our implementation of a tool which allows interoperation between a concurrent superset of the Prolog programming language and C#. This enables Prolog to be used as a native implementation language for Microsoft's .NET platform. P# compiles a linear logic extension of Prolog to C# source code. We can thus create C# objects from Prolog and use C#'s graphical, networking and other libraries. P# was developed from a modified port of the Prolog to Java translator, Prolog Cafe. We add language constructs on the Prolog side which allow concurrent Prolog code to be written. We add a primitive predicate which evaluates a Prolog structure on a newly forked thread. Communication between threads is based on the unification of variables contained in such a structure. It is also possible for threads to communicate through a globally accessible table. All of the new features are available to the programmer through new built-in Prolog predicates. We present three case studies. The first is an application which allows several users to modify a database. The users are able to disconnect from the database and to modify their own copies of the data before reconnecting. On reconnecting, conflicts must be resolved. The second is an object-oriented assistant, which allows the user to query the contents of a C# namespace or Java package. The third is a tool which allows a user to interact with a graphical display of the inheritance tree. Finally, we optimize P#'s runtime speed by translating some Prolog predicates into more idiomatic C# code than is produced by a naive port of Prolog Cafe. This is achieved by observing that semi-deterministic predicates (being those which always either fail or succeed with exactly one solution) that only call other semi-deterministic predicates enjoy relatively simple control flow. We make use of the fact that Prolog programs often contain predicates which operate as functions, and that such predicates are usually semi-deterministic

Compilation of bottom-up evaluation for a pure logic programming language

Abstraction in programming languages is usually achieved at the price of run time efficiency. This thesis presents a compilation scheme for the Starlog logic programming language. In spite of being very abstract, Starlog can be compiled to an efficient executable form. Starlog implements stratified negation and includes logically pure facilities for input and output, aggregation and destructive assignment. The main new work described in this thesis is (1) a bottom-up evaluation technique which is optimised for Starlog programs, (2) a static indexing structure that allows significant compile time optimisation, (3) an intermediate language to represent bottom-up logic programs and (4) an evaluation of automatic data structure selection techniques. It is shown empirically that the performance of compiled Starlog programs can be competitive with that of equivalent hand-coded programs