Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Designing Unification Procedures Using Transformations: A Survey

  • Conference paper
Logic from Computer Science

Part of the book series: Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications ((MSRI,volume 21))

  • 289 Accesses

Abstract

Unification is a very general computational paradigm that plays an important role in many different areas of symbolic computation. For example, unification plays a central role in

  • Automated Deduction (First-order logic with or without equality, higher-order logic);

  • Logic Programming (Prolog, λ-Prolog);

  • Constraint-based Programming;

  • Type Inferencing (ML, ML+, etc.);

  • Knowledge-Base Systems, Feature structures; and

  • Computational Linguistics (Unification grammars).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aït-Kaci, H. A lattice theoretic approach to computation based on a calculus of partially ordered type structures, Ph.D. thesis. Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, PA (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aït-Kaci, H. An algebraic semantics approach to the effective resolution of type equations. Theoretical Computer Science 45, pp. 293–351 (1986).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Andrews, P.B., “Resolution in Type Theory”, JSL 36:3 (1971) 414–432.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Andrews, P . Theorem Proving via General Matings.J.ACM 28(2), 193–214, 1981

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Andrews, P. An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Type Theory: To Truth Through Proof. Academic Press, New York, 1986.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Andrews, P.B., D. Miller, E. Cohen, F. Pfenning, “Automating Higher-Order Logic”, Contemporary Mathematics 29, 169–192, 1984.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Bachmair, L., Proof Methods for Equational Theories, Ph.D thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, Illinois (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bachmair, L., Canonical Equational Proofs, Research Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, Wiley and Sons, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bachmair, L., Dershowitz, N., and Plaisted, D., “Completion without Failure”, Resolution of Equations in Algebraic Structures, Vol. 2, Aït-Kaci and Nivat, editors, Academic Press, 1–30 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bachmair, L., Dershowitz, N., and Hsiang, J., “Orderings for Equational Proofs”, In Proc. Symp. Logic in Computer Science, Boston, Mass. (1986) 346–357.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Barendregt, H.P., The Lambda Calculus, North-Holland (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bibel, W. Tautology Testing With a Generalized Matrix Reduction Method, TCS 8, pp. 31–44, 1979.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Bibel, W . On Matrices With Connections, J.ACM 28, pp. 633–645, 1981.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Bibel, W. Automated Theorem Proving. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, 1982.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Boudet, A., Jouannaud, J.-P., and Schmidt-Schauss, M. Unification in Boolean Rings and Abelian Groups. Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(5), pp. 449–478 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Bürckert, H., Herold, A., and Schmidt-Schauss, M. On equational theories, unification, and (un)decidability. Special issue on Unification, Part II, Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(1 & 2), 3–50 (1989).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Bürckert, H., Matching-A Special Case of Unification? Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(5), pp. 523–536 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Choi, J., and Gallier, J.H. A simple algebraic proof of the NP-completeness of rigid E-unification, in preparation (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Church, A., “A Formulation of the Simple Theory of Types”, JSL 5 (1940) 56–68.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Comon, H. Unification and Disunification. Theorie et Applications, These de l’Tnstitut Polytechnique de Grenoble (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Darlington, J.L., “A Partial Mechanization of Second-Order Logic”, Machine Intelligence 6 (1971) 91–100.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Dershowitz, N, “Termination of Rewriting”, Journal of Symbolic Computation 3(1987) 69–116.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Dougherty, D., and Johann, P., “An Improved General E-Unification Method”, CADE’90, Kaiserslautern, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Elliot, C, and Pfenning, F., “A Family of Program Derivations for Higher-Order Unification”, Ergo Report 87–045, CMU, November 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fages, F. and Huet, G., “Complete Sets of Unifiers and Matchers in Equational Theories”, TCS 43 (1986) 189–200.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Farmer, W., Length of Proofs and Unification Theory, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin—Madison (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Farmer, W. “A Unification Algorithm for Second-Order Monadic Terms”, Unpublished Technical Report, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fay, M., “First-order Unification in an Equational Theory”, Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Automated Deduction, Austin, Texas (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Felty, A., and Miller, D., “Specifying Theorem Provers in a Higher-Order Logic Programming Language”, Ninth International Conference on Automated Deduction, Argonne, Illinois (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gallier, J.H. Logic for Computer Science: Foundations of Automatic Theorem Proving, Harper and Row, New York (1986).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Gallier, J.H., Raatz, S., “Extending SLD-Resolution to Equational Horn Clauses Using E-unification”, Journal of Logic Programming 6(1–2), 3–56 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Gallier, J.H., Raatz, S., and Snyder, W., “Theorem Proving using Rigid E-Unification: Equational Matings”, LICS’87, Ithaca, New York (1987) 338–346.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gallier, J.H., Narendran, P., Plaisted, D., Raatz, S., and Snyder, W., “Finding canonical rewriting systems equivalent to a finite set of ground equations in polynomial time”, submitted to J.ACM (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gallier, J.H., Narendran, P., Plaisted, D., and Snyder, W., “Rigid E-unification is NP-complete”, LICS’88, Edinburgh, Scotland, July 5–8, 1988, 218–227.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gallier, J.H., and Snyder, W. Complete Sets of Transformations For General E-Unification. Special issue of Theoretical Computer Science 67(2–3), 203–260 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Gallier, J.H., Raatz, S, and Snyder, W. Rigid E-Unification and its Applications to Equational Matings. Resolution of Equations in Algebraic Structures, Vol. 1, Ait-Kaci and Nivat, editors, Academic Press, 151–216 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gallier, J.H., Narendran, P., Plaisted, D., and Snyder, W. Rigid E-Unification: NP-completeness and Applications to Theorem Proving. To appear in a special issue of Information and Computation, pp. 64 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Gallier, J.H., Narendran, P., Raatz, S., and Snyder, W. Theorem Proving Using Equational Matings and Rigid E-Unification. To appear in J.ACM, pp. 62 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Girard, J.Y., “Linear Logic”, Theoretical Computer Science 50:1 (1987) 1–102.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Goguen, J.A. What is Unification? A categorical View of Substitution, Equation and Solution. Resolution of Equations in Algebraic Structures, Vol. 1, Aït-Kaci and Nivat, editors, Academic Press, 217–261 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Goguen, J.A., and Meseguer, J., “Eqlog: Equality, Types, and Generic Modules for Logic Programming”, in Functional and Logic Programming, Degroot, D. and Lind-strom, G., eds., Prentice-Hall (1985). Short version in Journal of Logic Programming 2 (1984) 179–210.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Goldfarb, W., “The Undecidability of the Second-Order Unification Problem”, TCS 13:2 (1981) 225–230.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Gould, W.E., A Matching Procedure for Omega-Order Logic, Ph.D. Thesis, Princeton University, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Guard, J.R., “Automated Logic for Semi-Automated Mathematics”, Scientific Report 1, AFCRL 64–411, Contract AF 19 (628)-3250 AD 602 710.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Guard, J., Oglesby, J., and Settle, L., “Semi-Automated Mathematics”, JACM 16 (1969) 49–62.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Hannan, J. and Miller, D., “Enriching a Meta-Language with Higher-Order Features”, Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic Programming, Bristol (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hannan, J. and Miller, D., “Uses of Higher-Order Unification for Implementing Program Transformers”, Fifth International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Herbrand, J. , “Sur la Théorie de la Demonstration”, in Logical Writings, W. Goldfarb, ed., Cambridge (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hindley, J., and Seidin, J., Introduction to Combinators and Lambda Calculus, Cambridge University Press (1986).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Huet, G. Constrained Resolution: A Complete Method for Higher-Order Logic, Ph.D. thesis, Case Western Reserve University (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Huet, G. , “A Mechanization of Type Theory”, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1973) 139–146.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Huet, G., “The Undecidability of Unification in Third-Order Logic”, Information and Control 22 (1973) 257–267.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Huet, G., “A Unification Algorithm for Typed λ-Calculus”, TCS 1 (1975) 27–57.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  54. Huet, G., Résolution d’Equations dans les Langages d’Ordre 1,2,…, ω, Thèse d’Etat, Université de Paris VII (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Huet, G., and Lang, B., “Proving and Applying Program Transformations Expressed with Second-Order Patterns”, Acta Informatica 11 (1978) 31–55.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  56. Huet, G., “Confluent Reductions: Abstract Properties and Applications to Term Rewriting Systems,” JACM 27:4 (1980) 797–821.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Hullot, J.-M. , “Canonical Forms and Unification”, CADE-5 (1980) 318–334.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Hussmann, H. , “Unification in Conditional Equational Theories”, Proceedings of the EUROCAL 1985, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 204, p. 543–553.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  59. Hsiang, J., and Jouannaud, J.-P. General E-unification revisited. In Proceedings of UNIF’88, C. Kirchner and G. Smolka, editors, CRIN Report 89R38, pp. 51 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Isakowitz, T. Theorem Proving Methods For Order-Sorted Logic, Ph.D. thesis. Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Jouannaud, J.-P., and Kirchner, C. Solving Equations in Abstract Algebras: A Rule-Based Survey of Unification. Technical Report, University of Paris Sud (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Kaplan, S., “Fair Conditional Term Rewriting Systems: Unification, Termination, and Confluence”, Technical Report 194, Universite de Paris-Sud, Centre D’Orsay, Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Kirchner, C , “A New Equational Unification Method: A Generalization of Martelli-Montanari’s Algorithm”, CADE-7, Napa Valley (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kirchner, C, Méthodes et Outils de Conception Systematique d’Algorithmes d’Unification dans les Theories Equationnelles, These d’Etat, Université de Nancy I (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kirchner, C, “Computing Unification Algorithms,” LICS’86, Cambridge, Mass. (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Kirchner, C. and Kirchner, H., Contribution a la Resolution d’Equations dans les Algèbres Libres et les Varietes Equationnelles dAlgèbres, These de 3e cycle, Université de Nancy I (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kfoury, A.J., J. Tiuryn, and P. Urzyczyn, “An analysis of ML typability”, submitted (a section of this paper will appear in the proceedings of CAAP 1990 under the title “ML typability is DEXPTIME-complete”).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kfoury, A.J., J. Tiuryn, and P. Urzyczyn, “The undecidability of the semi-unification problem”, Proceedings of STOC (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kfoury, A.J., and J. Tiuryn, “Type Reconstruction in Finite-Rank Fragments of the Polymorphic Lambda Calculus”, LICS’90, Philadelpha, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Knight. K. “A Multidisciplinary Survey”, ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 93–124 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  71. Knuth, D.E. and Bendix, P.B., “Simple Word Problems in Univeral Algebras”, in Computational Problems in Abstract Algebra, Leech, J., ed., Pergamon Press (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Kozen, D., “Complexity of Finitely Presented Algebras,” Technical Report TR 76–294, Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Kozen, D., “Positive First-Order Logic is NP-Complete”, IBM Journal of Research and Development, 25:4 (1981) 327–332.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  74. Lankford, D.S. , “Canonical Inference”, Report ATP-32, University of Texas (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  75. Lassez, J.-L., Mäher, M., and Marriot, K. Unification Revisited. Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, J. Minker, editor, Morgan-Kaufman, pp. 587–625 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Le Chenadec, P. On the Logic of Unification. Special issue on Unification, Part II, Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(1 & 2), 141–200 (1989).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  77. Lucchesi, C.L., “The Undecidability of the Unification Problem for Third Order Languages”, Report CSRR 2059, Dept. of Applied Analysis and Computer Science, University of Waterloo (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Machtey, M. and Young, P.R., An Introduction to the General Theory of Algorithms, Elsevier North-Holland, NY, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Martelli, A., Montanari, U., “An Efficient Unification Algorithm”, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 4:2 (1982) 258–282.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  80. Martelli, A., Rossi, G.F., and Moiso, C. Lazy Unification Algorithms for Canonical Rewrite Systems. Resolution of Equations in Algebraic Structures, Vol. 2,Aït-Kaci and Nivat, editors, Academic Press, 245–274(1989).

    Google Scholar 

  81. Meseguer, J., Goguen, J. A., and Smolka, G. Order-Sorted Unification. Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(4), pp. 383–413 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. Miller, D., Proofs in Higher-Order Logic, Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Miller, D. A. Expansion Trees and Their Conversion to Natural Deduction Proofs. In 7th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Napa, CA, edited by R.E. Shostak, L.N.CS, No. 170, New York: Springer Verlag, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Miller, D. A compact Representation of Proofs. Studia Logica 4/87, pp. 347–370 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Miller, D., and Nadathur, G., “Higher-Order Logic Programming”, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Logic Programming, London (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Miller, D., and Nadathur, G., “A Logic Programming Approach to Manipulating Formulas and Programs”, IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, San Franciso (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  87. Miller, D., and Nadathur, G., “Some Uses of Higher-Order Logic in Computational Linguistics”, 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (1986) 247–255.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  88. Milner, R. A theory of type polymorphism in programming. J. Comput. Sys. Sci. 17, pp. 348–375 (1978).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  89. Nadathur, G., A Higher-Order Logic as the Basis for Logic Programming, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  90. Nelson G. and Oppen, D. C. Fast Decision Procedures Based on Congruence Closure. J. ACM 27(2), 356–364, 1980.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  91. Nutt, W., Réty, P., and Smolka, G., “Basic Narrowing Revisited”, Special Issue on Unification, Part I Journal of Symbolic Computation 7(3 & 4), pp. 295–318 (1989).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  92. Paterson, M.S., Wegman, M.N., “Linear Unification”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 16 (1978) 158–167.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  93. Paulson, L.C., “Natural Deduction as Higher-Order Resolution”, Journal of Logic Programming 3:3 (1986) 237–258.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  94. Pfenning, F., Proof Transformations in Higher-Order Logic, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pa. (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  95. Pfenning, F., “Partial Polymorphic Type Inference and Higher-Order Unification”, in Proceedings of the 1988 ACM Conference on Lisp and Functional Programming, ACM, July 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Pfenning, F., and Elliott, C, “Higher-Order Abstract Syntax”, Proceedings of the SIGPLAN ’88 Symposium on Language Design and Implementation, ACM, June 1988. 97. Pietrzykowski, T., “A Complete Mechanization of Second-Order Logic”, J ACM 20:2 (1971) 333–364.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Pietrzykowski, T.,“A Complete Mechanization of Second-Order Logic,” JACM 20:2 (1971) 333–364.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  98. Pietrzykowski, T., and Jensen, D., “Mechanizing cj-Order Type Theory Through Unification”, TCS 3 (1976) 123–171.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  99. Piotkin, G., “Building in Equational Theories,” Machine Intelligence 7 (1972) 73–90.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Rémy, Didier, “Algèbres Touffues. Application au typage polymorphique des objects enregistrements dans les languages fonctionnels”. These, Université Paris VII, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Rémy, Didier, “Records and variants as a natural extension in ML”, Sixteenth ACM Annual Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Austin Texas, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Rety, P., “Improving Basic Narrowing Techniques”, Proceedings of the RTA, Bordeaux, Prance (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  103. Robinson, J.A., “A Machine Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle”, JACM 12 (1965) 23–41.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  104. Robinson, J.A. , “A Review on Automatic Theorem Proving”, Annual Symposia in Applied Mathematics, 1–18 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  105. Robinson, J.A., “Mechanizing Higher-Order Logic”, Machine Intelligence 4 (1969) 151–170.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  106. Siekmann, J. H. Unification Theory, Special Issue on Unification, Part I, Journal of Symbolic Computation 7(3 & 4), pp. 207–274 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  107. Siekmann, J. H., and Szabo, P. Universal unification and classification of equational theories. CADE’82, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, No. 138 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  108. Shieber, S. An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar. CSLI Lecture Notes Series, Center for the study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  109. Slagle, J.R., “Automated Theorem Proving for Theories with Simplifiers, Commuta-tivity, and Associativity”, JACM 21 (1974) 622–642.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  110. Schmidt-Schauss, M. Unification in Permutative Equational Theories is Undecidable. Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(4), pp. 415–422 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  111. Schmidt-Schauss, M. Unification in a Combination of Arbitrary Disjoint Equational Theories. Special issue on Unification, Part II, Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(1 k 2), 51–99 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  112. Snyder, W. Complete Sets of Transformations for General Unification, Ph.D. thesis. Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, PA (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  113. Snyder, W., and Gallier, J.H., “Higher-Order Unification Revisited: Complete Sets of Transformations”, Special issue on Unification, Part II, Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(1 & 2), 101–140 (1989).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  114. Snyder, W., “Efficient Ground Completion: A Fast Algorithm for Generating Reduced Ground Rewriting Systems from a Set of Ground Equations”, RTA’89, Chapel Hill, NC (journal version submitted for publication).

    Google Scholar 

  115. Snyder, W., “Higher-Order E-Unification”, CADE’90, Kaiserslautern, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Snyder, W. The Theory of General Unification. Birkhauser Boston, Inc. (in preparation).

    Google Scholar 

  117. Snyder, W., and C. Lynch, “Goal-Directed Strategies for Paramodulation”, Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Rewrite Techniques and Applications, Como, Italy (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  118. Statman, R., “On the Existence of Closed Terms in the Typed A-Calculus II: Transformations of Unification Problems”, TCS 15:3 (1981) 329–338.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  119. Szabo, P. Unifikationstheorie erster Ordnung, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Karlsruhe (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  120. Tiden, E., and Arnborg, S. Unification problems with one-sided distributivity. Journal of Symbolic Computation 3(1 & 2), pp. 183–202 (1987).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  121. Winterstein, G., “Unification in Second-Order Logic”, Electronische Informationsverarbeitung und Kybernetik 13 (1977) 399–411.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  122. Yelick, K. Unification in combinations of collapse-free regular theories. Journal of Symbolic Computation 3(1 & 2), pp. 153–182 (1987).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  123. Zaionc, Marek , “The Set of Unifiers in Typed A-Calculus as a Regular Expression”, Proceedings of the RTA 1985.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer and Information Science Department, University of Pennsylvania, 200 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Jean H. Gallier

  2. Computer Science Department, Boston University, 111 Cummington Street, Boston, MA, 02215, USA

    Wayne Snyder

Authors
  1. Jean H. Gallier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wayne Snyder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, University of California at Los Angeles, 90024-1766, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Yiannis N. Moschovakis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gallier, J.H., Snyder, W. (1992). Designing Unification Procedures Using Transformations: A Survey. In: Moschovakis, Y.N. (eds) Logic from Computer Science. Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications, vol 21. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2822-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2822-6_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-7685-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-2822-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation