B-LOG: A branch and bound methodology for the parallel execution of logic programs

We propose a computational methodology -"B-LOG"-, which offers the potential for an effective implementation of Logic Programming in a parallel computer. We also propose a weighting scheme to guide the search process through the graph and we apply the concepts of parallel "branch and bound" algorithms in order to perform a "best-first" search using an information theoretic bound. The concept of "session" is used to speed up the search process in a succession of similar queries. Within a session, we strongly modify the bounds in a local database, while bounds kept in a global database are weakly modified to provide a better initial condition for other sessions. We also propose an implementation scheme based on a database machine using "semantic paging", and the "B-LOG processor" based on a scoreboard driven controller.

Abstract verification and debugging of constraint logic programs

The technique of Abstract Interpretation [13] has allowed the development of sophisticated program analyses which are provably correct and practical. The semantic approximations produced by such analyses have been traditionally applied to optimization during program compilation. However, recently, novel and promising applications of semantic approximations have been proposed in the more general context of program verification and debugging [3],[10],[7].

On the role of semantic approximations in validation and diagnosis of constraint logic programs

Abstract is not available.

Estimating the computational cost of logic programs

Information about the computational cost of programs is potentially useful for a variety of purposes, including selecting among different algorithms, guiding program transformations, in granularity control and mapping decisions in parallelizing compilers, and query optimization in deductive databases. Cost analysis of logic programs is complicated by nondeterminism: on the one hand, procedures can return múltiple Solutions, making it necessary to estímate the number of solutions in order to give nontrivial upper bound cost estimates; on the other hand, the possibility of failure has to be taken into account while estimating lower bounds. Here we discuss techniques to address these problems to some extent.

A generic framework for context-sensitive analysis of modular programs

Context-sensitive analysis provides information which is potentially more accurate than that provided by context-free analysis. Such information can then be applied in order to validate/debug the program and/or to specialize the program obtaining important improvements. Unfortunately, context-sensitive analysis of modular programs poses important theoretical and practical problems. One solution, used in several proposals, is to resort to context-free analysis. Other proposals do address context-sensitive analysis, but are only applicable when the description domain used satisfies rather restrictive properties. In this paper, we argüe that a general framework for context-sensitive analysis of modular programs, Le., one that allows using all the domains which have proved useful in practice in the non-modular setting, is indeed feasible and very useful. Driven by our experience in the design and implementation of analysis and specialization techniques in the context of CiaoPP, the Ciao system preprocessor, in this paper we discuss a number of design goals for context-sensitive analysis of modular programs as well as the problems which arise in trying to meet these goals. We also provide a high-level description of a framework for analysis of modular programs which does substantially meet these objectives. This framework is generic in that it can be instantiated in different ways in order to adapt to different contexts. Finally, the behavior of the different instantiations w.r.t. the design goals that motivate our work is also discussed.

An assertion language for constraint logic programs

In an advanced program development environment, such as that discussed in the introduction of this book, several tools may coexist which handle both the program and information on the program in different ways. Also, these tools may interact among themselves and with the user. Thus, the different tools and the user need some way to communicate. It is our design principie that such communication be performed in terms of assertions. Assertions are syntactic objects which allow expressing properties of programs. Several assertion languages have been used in the past in different contexts, mainly related to program debugging. In this chapter we propose a general language of assertions which is used in different tools for validation and debugging of constraint logic programs in the context of the DiSCiPl project. The assertion language proposed is parametric w.r.t. the particular constraint domain and properties of interest being used in each different tool. The language proposed is quite general in that it poses few restrictions on the kind of properties which may be expressed. We believe the assertion language we propose is of practical relevance and appropriate for the different uses required in the tools considered.

Debugging of constraint programs: The DiSCiPl methodology and tools

This introduction gives a general perspective of the debugging methodology and the tools developed in the ESPRIT IV project DiSCiPl Debugging Systems for Constraint Programming. It has been prepared by the editors of this volume by substantial rewriting of the DiSCiPl deliverable CP Debugging Tools [1]. This introduction is organised as follows. Section 1 outlines the DiSCiPl view of debugging, its associated debugging methodology, and motivates the kinds of tools proposed: the assertion based tools, the declarative diagnoser and the visualisation tools. Sections 2 through 4 provide a short presentation of the tools of each kind. Finally, Section 5 presents a summary of the tools developed in the project. This introduction gives only a general view of the DiSCiPl debugging methodology and tools. For details and for specific bibliographic referenees the reader is referred to the subsequent chapters.

The ciao approach to the dynamic vs. static language dilemma. Proceedings for the international workshop on scripts to programs

Abstract is not available

Two efficient representations for set-sharing analysis in logic programs

Set-Sharing analysis, the classic Jacobs and Langen's domain, has been widely used to infer several interesting properties of programs at compile-time such as occurs-check reduction, automatic parallelization, flnite-tree analysis, etc. However, performing abstract uniflcation over this domain implies the use of a closure operation which makes the number of sharing groups grow exponentially. Much attention has been given in the literature to mitígate this key inefficiency in this otherwise very useful domain. In this paper we present two novel alternative representations for the traditional set-sharing domain, tSH and tNSH. which compress efficiently the number of elements into fewer elements enabling more efficient abstract operations, including abstract uniflcation, without any loss of accuracy. Our experimental evaluation supports that both representations can reduce dramatically the number of sharing groups showing they can be more practical solutions towards scalable set-sharing.

Towards execution time estimation for logic programs via static analysis and profiling

Effective static analyses have been proposed which infer bounds on the number of resolutions or reductions. These have the advantage of being independent from the platform on which the programs are executed and have been shown to be useful in a number of applications, such as granularity control in parallel execution. On the other hand, in distributed computation scenarios where platforms with different capabilities come into play, it is necessary to express costs in metrics that include the characteristics of the platform. In particular, it is specially interesting to be able to infer upper and lower bounds on actual execution times. With this objective in mind, we propose an approach which combines compile-time analysis for cost bounds with a one-time profiling of the platform in order to determine the valúes of certain parameters for a given platform. These parameters calíbrate a cost model which, from then on, is able to compute statically time bound functions for procedures and to predict with a significant degree of accuracy the execution times of such procedures in the given platform. The approach has been implemented and integrated in the CiaoPP system.

A generic framework for the analysis and specialization of logic programs

The relationship between abstract interpretation and partial deduction has received considerable attention and (partial) integrations have been proposed starting from both the partial deduction and abstract interpretation perspectives. In this work we present what we argüe is the first fully described generic algorithm for efñcient and precise integration of abstract interpretation and partial deduction. Taking as starting point state-of-the-art algorithms for context-sensitive, polyvariant abstract interpretation and (abstract) partial deduction, we present an algorithm which combines the best of both worlds. Key ingredients include the accurate success propagation inherent to abstract interpretation and the powerful program transformations achievable by partial deduction. In our algorithm, the calis which appear in the analysis graph are not analyzed w.r.t. the original definition of the procedure but w.r.t. specialized definitions of these procedures. Such specialized definitions are obtained by applying both unfolding and abstract executability. Our framework is parametric w.r.t. different control strategies and abstract domains. Different combinations of such parameters correspond to existing algorithms for program analysis and specialization. Simultaneously, our approach opens the door to the efñcient computation of strictly more precise results than those achievable by each of the individual techniques. The algorithm is now one of the key components of the CiaoPP analysis and specialization system.

Some issues in analysis and specialization of modular ciao-prolog programs

Separating programs into modules is a well-known technique which has proven very useful in program development and maintenance. Starting by introducing a number of possible scenarios, in this paper we study different issues which appear when developing analysis and specialization techniques for modular logic programming. We discuss a number of design alternatives and their consequences for the different scenarios considered and describe where applicable the decisions made in the Ciao system analyzer and specializer. In our discussion we use the module system of Ciao Prolog. This is both for concreteness and because Ciao Prolog is a second-generation Prolog system which has been designed with global analysis and specialization in mind, and which has a strict module system. The aim of this work is not to provide a theoretical basis on modular analysis and specialization, but rather to discuss some interesting practical issues.

A system for automatically generating documentation for (C)LP programs

We describe lpdoc, a tool which generates documentation manuals automatically from one or more logic program source files, written in ISO-Prolog, Ciao, and other (C)LP languages. It is particularly useful for documenting library modules, for which it automatically generates a rich description of the module interface. However, it can also be used quite successfully to document full applications. A fundamental advantage of using lpdoc is that it helps maintaining a true correspondence between the program and its documentation, and also identifying precisely to what version of the program a given printed manual corresponds. The quality of the documentation generated can be greatly enhanced by including within the program text assertions (declarations with types, modes, etc.) for the predicates in the program, and machine-readable comments. One of the main novelties of lpdoc is that these assertions and comments are written using the Ciao system assertion language, which is also the language of communication between the compiler and the user and between the components of the compiler. This allows a significant synergy among specification, documentation, optimization, etc. A simple compatibility library allows conventional (C)LP systems to ignore these assertions and comments and treat normally programs documented in this way. The documentation can be generated in many formats including texinfo, dvi, ps, pdf, info, html/css, Unix nroff/man, Windows help, etc., and can include bibliographic citations and images. lpdoc can also generate “man” pages (Unix man page format), nicely formatted plain ascii “readme” files, installation scripts useful when the manuals are included in software distributions, brief descriptions in html/css or info formats suitable for inclusion in on-line indices of manuals, and even complete WWW and info sites containing on-line catalogs of documents and software distributions. The lpdoc manual, all other Ciao system manuals, and parts of this paper are generated by lpdoc.

An assertion language for debugging of constraint logic programs

Abstract is not available.

Estrategias Avanzadas de Tabulación y Paralelismo en Programas Lógicos = Advanced Evaluation Strategies for Tabling and Parallelism in Logic Programs

Dentro de los paradigmas de programación en el mundo de la informática tenemos la "Programación Lógica'', cuyo principal exponente es el lenguaje Prolog. Los programas Prolog se componen de un conjunto de predicados, cada uno de ellos definido en base a reglas que aportan un elevado nivel de abstracción y declaratividad al programador. Sin embargo, las formulación con reglas implica, frecuentemente, que un predicado se recompute varias veces para la misma consulta y además, Prolog utiliza un orden fijo para evaluar reglas y objetivos (evaluación SLD) que puede entrar en "bucles infinitos'' cuando ejecuta reglas recursivas declarativamente correctas. Estas limitaciones son atacadas de raiz por la tabulación, que se basa en "recordar'' en una tabla las llamadas realizadas y sus soluciones. Así, en caso de repetir una llamada tendríamos ya disponibles sus soluciones y evitamos la recomputación. También evita "bucles infinitos'' ya que las llamadas que los generan son suspendidas, quedando a la espera de que se computen soluciones para las mismas. La implementación de la tabulación no es sencilla. En particular, necesita de tres operaciones que no pueden ser ejecutadas en tiempo constante simultáneamente. Dichas operaciones son: suspensión de llamadas, relanzamiento de llamadas y {acceso a variables. La primera parte de la tesis compara tres implementaciones de tabulación sobre Ciao, cada una de las cuales penaliza una de estas operaciones. Por tanto, cada solución tiene sus ventajas y sus inconvenientes y se comportan mejor o peor dependiendo del programa ejecutado. La segunda parte de la tesis mejora la funcionalidad de la tabulación para combinarla con restricciones y también para evitar computaciones innecesarias. La programación con restricciones permite la resolución de ecuaciones como medio de programar, mecanismo altamente declarativo. Hemos desarrollado un framework para combinar la tabulación con las restricciones, priorizando objetivos como la flexibilidad, la eficiencia y la generalidad de nuestra solución, obteniendo una sinergia entre ambas técnicas que puede ser aplicada en numerosas aplicaciones. Por otra parte, un aspecto fundamental de la tabulación hace referencia al momento en que se retornan las soluciones de una llamada tabulada. Local evaluation devuelve soluciones cuando todas las soluciones de la llamada tabulada han sido computadas. Por contra, batched evaluation devuelve las soluciones una a una conforme van siendo computadas, por lo que se adapta mejor a problemas donde no nos interesa encontrar todas las soluciones. Sin embargo, su consumo de memoria es exponencialmente peor que el de local evaluation. La tesis presenta swapping evaluation, que devuelve soluciones tan pronto como son computadas pero con un consumo de memoria similar a la de local evaluation. Además, se implementan operadores de poda, once/1, para descartar la búsqueda de soluciones alternativas cuando encontramos la solución deseada. Por último, Prolog adopta con relativa facilidad soluciones para paralelismo gracias a su flexibilidad en el control de la ejecución y a que sus asignaciones son lógicas. La tercera parte de la tesis extiende el paralelismo conjuntivo de Ciao para trabajar con programas no deterministas, lo que presenta dos problemas principales: los objetivos atrapados y la recomputación de objetivos. Las soluciones clásicas para los objetivos atrapados rompían muchos invariantes de la ejecución Prolog, siendo soluciones difíciles de mantener y de extender, que la experiencia nos dice que han caído en desuso. Nosotros proponemos una solución modular (basada en la implementación de swapping evaluation), localizada y que no rompe los invariantes de la ejecución Prolog, pero que mantiene un alto rendimiento de la ejecución paralela. En referencia a la recomputación de objetivos paralelos en presencia de no determinismo hemos adaptado ténicas derivadas de la tabulación para memorizar computaciones de estos objetivos y evitar su recomputación.