Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userUnfolding in CHR
439
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Maria Chiara Meo
Publication date
2008
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Program transformation is an appealing technique which allows to improve run-time efficiency, space-consumption and more generally to optimize a given program. Essentially it consists of a sequence of syntactic program manipulations which preserves some kind of semantic equivalence. One of the basic operations which is used by most program transformation systems is unfolding which consists in the replacement of a procedure call by its definition. While there is a large body of literature on transformation and unfolding of sequential programs, very few papers have addressed this issue for concurrent languages and, to the best of our knowledge, no other has considered unfolding of CHR programs. This paper defines a correct unfolding system for CHR programs. We define an unfolding rule, show its correctness and discuss some conditions which can be used to delete an unfolded rule while preserving the program meaning. We prove that confluence and termination properties are preserved by the above transformations.
rate research
Read More
Program transformation is an appealing technique which allows to improve run-time efficiency, space-consumption, and more generally to optimize a given program. Essentially, it consists of a sequence of syntactic program manipulations which preserves some kind of semantic equivalence. Unfolding is one of the basic operations which is used by most program transformation systems and which consists in the replacement of a procedure call by its definition. While there is a large body of literature on transformation and unfolding of sequential programs, very few papers have addressed this issue for concurrent languages. This paper defines an unfolding system for CHR programs. We define an unfolding rule, show its correctness and discuss some conditions which can be used to delete an unfolded rule while preserving the program meaning. We also prove that, under some suitable conditions, confluence and termination are preserved by the above transformation. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)
Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) are a committed-choice declarative language which has been designed for writing constraint solvers. A CHR program consists of multi-headed guarded rules which allow one to rewrite constraints into simpler ones until a solved form is reached. CHR has received a considerable attention, both from the practical and from the theoretical side. Nevertheless, due the use of multi-headed clauses, there are several aspects of the CHR semantics which have not been clarified yet. In particular, no compositional semantics for CHR has been defined so far. In this paper we introduce a fix-point semantics which characterizes the input/output behavior of a CHR program and which is and-compositional, that is, which allows to retrieve the semantics of a conjunctive query from the semantics of its components. Such a semantics can be used as a basis to define incremental and modular analysis and verification tools.
We extend a technique called Compiling Control. The technique transforms coroutining logic programs into logic programs that, when executed under the standard left-to-right selection rule (and not using any delay features) have the same computational behavior as the coroutining program. In recent work, we revised Compiling Control and reformulated it as an instance of Abstract Conjunctive Partial Deduction. This work was mostly focused on the program analysis performed in Compiling Control. In the current paper, we focus on the synthesis of the transformed program. Instead of synthesizing a new logic program, we synthesize a CHR(Prolog) program which mimics the coroutining program. The synthesis to CHR yields programs containing only simplification rules, which are particularly amenable to certain static analysis techniques. The programs are also more concise and readable and can be ported to CHR implementations embedded in other languages than Prolog.
The most successful unfolding rules used nowadays in the partial evaluation of logic programs are based on well quasi orders (wqo) applied over (covering) ancestors, i.e., a subsequence of the atoms selected during a derivation. Ancestor (sub)sequences are used to increase the specialization power of unfolding while still guaranteeing termination and also to reduce the number of atoms for which the wqo has to be checked. Unfortunately, maintaining the structure of the ancestor relation during unfolding introduces significant overhead. We propose an efficient, practical local unfolding rule based on the notion of covering ancestors which can be used in combination with a wqo and allows a stack-based implementation without losing any opportunities for specialization. Using our technique, certain non-leftmost unfoldings are allowed as long as local unfolding is performed, i.e., we cover depth-first strategies.
We study the decidability of termination for two CHR dialects which, similarly to the Datalog like languages, are defined by using a signature which does not allow function symbols (of arity >0). Both languages allow the use of the = built-in in the body of rules, thus are built on a host language that supports unification. However each imposes one further restriction. The first CHR dialect allows only range-restricted rules, that is, it does not allow the use of variables in the body or in the guard of a rule if they do not appear in the head. We show that the existence of an infinite computation is decidable for this dialect. The second dialect instead limits the number of atoms in the head of rules to one. We prove that in this case, the existence of a terminating computation is decidable. These results show that both dialects are strictly less expressive than Turing Machines. It is worth noting that the language (without function symbols) without these restrictions is as expressive as Turing Machines.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
