Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Reasoning and modeling paradigms are incompatible.
| Content Provider | CiteSeerX |
|---|---|
| Author | Wegner, Peter |
| Abstract | Abstract: Object-oriented and logic-programming para-digms are shown to be incompatible as component-based models of computation. This “impossibility result,” based on a new notion of observability of interactions among components, suggests that combining object-oriented with logic programming is not merely hard but impossible. It implies the more general incompatibility of reasoning and modeling and the impossibility reducing modeling to reasoning as in automatic program verification. While paradigmatic incompatibility is the most startling result of this paper, its novel use of models and meaics is of independently interest. The final sec-tions introduce a notion of software complexity with parallels to computational complexity and a notion of “LP-completeness ” that parallels NP-completeness. 1. Components, Reactiveness, and Encapsulation Deductive reasoning constrains problem solving so severely that it precludes flexible computational (or con-ceptual) modeling. This incompatibility, which depends on precise definitions of deductive reasoning and model-ing, supports the intuition that logical people (and com-puters) are unadaptable and inflexible. The deductive rea-soning paradigm (exemplified by logic programming) computes by proving theorems from axioms by rules of inference, while the modeling paradigm (exemplified by object-oriented programming) represents application domains (modeled worlds) so that their behavior can be described, predicted, and computed. Though reasoning and modeling paradigms are equivalent in “what ” they can compute, they differ in “how ” they organize computation. Reasoning para-digms view computation as “action-oriented ” transfor-mation (by instruction execution), while modeling para-digms view computation as “object-oriented ” communi-cation (among persistent software components). Differ-ences between reasoning and modeling can also be expressed in terms of centralized versus distributed models of computation, or in terms of reduction (to subgoals) versus reaction (to stimuli). reasoning + action-oriented transformation + |
| File Format | |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Subject Keyword | Precise Definition Startling Result Persistent Software Component Modeling Paradigm Impossibility Result Modeling Paradigm Incompatible Object-oriented Communi-cation Instruction Execution Flexible Computational Final Sec-tions Novel Use New Notion Logical People Paradigmatic Incompatibility Automatic Program Verification Encapsulation Deductive Reasoning Constrains Problem Logic-programming Para-digms Computational Complexity Component-based Model Para-digms View Computation Logic Programming Action-oriented Transformation Application Domain Action-oriented Transfor-mation Deductive Reasoning Software Complexity Object-oriented Programming General Incompatibility Deductive Rea-soning Paradigm |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
