This article presents a dual dependency between AI and programming methodologies AI is an important source of ideas and tools for building sophisticated support facilities which make possible certain programming metho...
This article presents a dual dependency between AI and programming methodologies AI is an important source of ideas and tools for building sophisticated support facilities which make possible certain programming methodologies These advanced programming methodologies in turn can have profound effects upon the methodology of AI research Both of these dependencies are illustrated by the example of a new experimental programming methodology which is based upon partial evaluation Partial evaluation is based upon current AI ideas about reasoning, representation, and control The manner in which AI systems are designed, developed and tested can be significantly improved in the programming is supported by a sufficiently powerful partial evaluator In particular, the process of building levels of interpreters and of intertwining generate and test can be partially automated Finally, speculations about a more direct connection between AI and partial evaluation are presented.
In ordinary mathematics, an equation can be written down which is syntactically correct, but for which no solution exists. For example, consider the equation x = x + 1 defined over the real numbers; there is no value ...
详细信息
ISBN:
(数字)9781447132035
ISBN:
(纸本)9783540197805
In ordinary mathematics, an equation can be written down which is syntactically correct, but for which no solution exists. For example, consider the equation x = x + 1 defined over the real numbers; there is no value of x which satisfies it. Similarly it is possible to specify objects using the formal specification language Z [3,4], which can not possibly exist. Such specifications are called inconsistent and can arise in a number of ways. Example 1 The following Z specification of a functionf, from integers to integers "f x : ~ 1 x ~ O· fx = x + 1 (i) "f x : ~ 1 x ~ O· fx = x + 2 (ii) is inconsistent, because axiom (i) gives f 0 = 1, while axiom (ii) gives f 0 = 2. This contradicts the fact that f was declared as a function, that is, f must have a unique result when applied to an argument. Hence no suchfexists. Furthermore, iff 0 = 1 andfO = 2 then 1 = 2 can be deduced! From 1 = 2 anything can be deduced, thus showing the danger of an inconsistent specification. Note that all examples and proofs start with the word Example or Proof and end with the symbol.1.
暂无评论