Conference
Workshop on Logic Programming Environments
About: Workshop on Logic Programming Environments is an academic conference. The conference publishes majorly in the area(s): Set (abstract data type) & Tree (data structure). Over the lifetime, 7 publications have been published by the conference receiving 48 citations.
Topics: Set (abstract data type), Tree (data structure), Formal specification, Logic programming, Local consistency
Papers
Proceedings Article•
1 Jan 1995TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose controlled natural language as a declarative and application-specific specification language, which is a subset of natural language that can be accurately and efficiently processed by a computer, but is expressive enough to allow natural usage by non-specialis ts.
Abstract: Writing specifications for computer programs is not easy since one has to take into account the disparate conceptual worlds of the application domain and of software development. To bridge this conceptual gap we propose controlled natural language as a declarative and application-specific specification language. Controlled natural language is a subset of natural language that can be accurately and efficiently processed by a computer, but is expressive enough to allow natural usage by non-specialis ts. Specifications in controlled natural language are automatically translated into Prolog clauses, hence become formal and executable. The translation uses a Definite Clause Grammar (DCG) enhanced by feature structures. Inter-text references of the specification, e.g. anaphora, are resolved with the help of Discourse Representation Theory (DRT). The generated Prolog clauses are added to a knowledge base which can be queried and executed. We have implemented the prototypical specification system Attempto that successfully processes the specification of a simple automated teller machine.
23 citations
Proceedings Article•
1 Jan 2002
TL;DR: This paper presents a trace structure that provides information about additional important aspects of tracing CLP(FD) programs, and incorporates explanations in the trace structure, i.e. reasons for why certain solver actions occur.
Abstract: Previous work in the area of tracing CLP(FD) programs mainly focuses on providing information about control of execution and domain modification. In this paper, we present a trace structure that provides information about additional important aspects. We incorporate explanations in the trace structure, i.e. reasons for why certain solver actions occur. Furthermore, we come up with a format for describing the execution of the filtering algorithms of global constraints. Some new ideas about the design of the trace are also presented. For example, we have modeled our trace as a nested block structure in order to achieve a hierarchical view. Also, new ways about how to represent and identify different entities such as constraints and domain variables are presented.
10 citations
Proceedings Article•
1 Jan 1994
TL;DR: There is developmental, neuroanatomical, and neurophysiological evidence that suggests that the involvement of these operations in motor planning is a direct precursor of their involvement in natural language grammar.
Abstract: • AI Planning formalisms such as the Linear Dynamic Event Calculus (LDEC) provide a transparent notation for causal/teleological knowledge representations, in which: – Composition B characterizes seriation of actions in plans. – Type-raising T characterizes the affordances of objects. • Composition B and type raising T also show up as the defining operations of Combinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG). • There is developmental, neuroanatomical, and neurophysiological evidence that suggests that the involvement of these operations in motor planning is a direct precursor of their involvement in natural language grammar. • Multilayer Perceptrons, Associative Networks, and Recurrent Networks can be used to learn the building blocks of such systems.
7 citations
Proceedings Article•
1 Jan 2002
TL;DR: A brief overview of the declarative model underlying Gisela is given and the methodology proposed for building applications together with some real examples are presented.
Abstract: The Gisela framework for declarative programming was de-
veloped with the specific aim of providing a tool that would be useful for knowledge representation and reasoning within real-world applications To achieve this, a complete integration into an object-oriented application development environment was used The framework and methodology developed provide two alternative application programming interfaces (apis): Programming using objects or programming using a traditional equational declarative style In addition to providing complete integration, Gisela also allows extensions and modificationsdue to the general computation model and well-defined apis We give a brief overview of the declarative model underlying Gisela and we present the methodologyproposed for building applications together with some real examples
4 citations
Proceedings Article•
1 Jan 2002TL;DR: This paper is an attempt to fill the lack of formalization of value withdrawal explanations in constraint logic programming and it is hoped that this theoretical tool could help to validate some program- ming environments.
Abstract: Constraint logic programming combines declarativity and ef- ficiency thanks to constraint solvers implemented for specific domains Value withdrawal explanations have been efficiently used in s con- straints programming environments but there does not exist any formal- ization of them This paper is an attempt to fill this lack Furthermore, we hope that this theoretical tool could help to validate some program- ming environments A value withdrawal explanation is a tree describing the withdrawal of a value during a domain reduction by local consis- tency notions and labeling Domain reduction is formalized by a search tree using two kinds of operators: operators for local consistency notions and operators for labeling These operators are defined by sets of rules Proof trees are built with respect to these rules For each removed value, there exists such a proof tree which is the withdrawal explanation of this value
4 citations
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 1 |
| 2003 | 1 |
| 2002 | 3 |
| 1995 | 1 |
| 1994 | 1 |