Remove leading zeros in list in Prolog

Question

I have a list with an unknown number of zeros at the beginning of it, for example [0, 0, 0, 1, 2, 0, 3]. I need this list to be stripped of leading zeros, so that it would look like [1, 2, 0 , 3].

Here's what I have:

lead([Head | _], _) :- Head =\= 0.
lead([0 | Tail], _) :- 
  lead(Tail, Tail).

The output of which is simply True. Reading the trace shows that it is running until it has a list with no leading zeros, but then the answer doesn't propagate back up the stack. I'm pretty new to Prolog, so I can't figure out how to make it do that.

Answer 1

Here is a solution that works in all directions:

lead([],[]).
lead([H|T],[H|T]) :-
    dif(H,0).
lead([0|T],T2) :-
    lead(T,T2).

Some queries:

?- lead([0,0,0,1,2,0,3], L).
L = [1, 2, 0, 3] ;
false.


?- lead(L, []).
L = [] ;
L = [0] ;
L = [0, 0] ;
L = [0, 0, 0] ;
...


?- lead(L0, L).
L0 = L, L = [] ;
L0 = L, L = [_G489|_G490],
dif(_G489, 0) ;
L0 = [0],
L = [] ;
L0 = [0, _G495|_G496],
L = [_G495|_G496],
dif(_G495, 0) ;
L0 = [0, 0],
L = [] ;
L0 = [0, 0, _G501|_G502],
L = [_G501|_G502],
dif(_G501, 0) ;
L0 = [0, 0, 0],
L = [] ;
...

EDIT This predicate actually doesn't work for e.g. lead(L0, [0,1,2]).

Answer 2

With library(reif):

:- use_module(reif).

remove_leading_zeros([], []).
remove_leading_zeros([H|T], Rest) :-
        if_(    H = 0,
                remove_leading_zeros(T, Rest),
                Rest = [H|T]).

Then:

?- remove_leading_zeros([0,0,0,1,2,0,3], R).
R = [1, 2, 0, 3].

?- remove_leading_zeros([2,0,3], R).
R = [2, 0, 3].

?- remove_leading_zeros(L, R).
L = R, R = [] ;
L = [0],
R = [] ;
L = [0, 0],
R = [] ;
L = [0, 0, 0],
R = [] . % and so on

Answer 3

Here is a solution that actually works for all possible inputs and doesn't leave unnecessary choice points:

lead(L0, L) :-
    (   nonvar(L),
        L = [H|_] ->
        dif(H,0)
        ;
        true
    ),
    lead_(L0, L).

lead_([], []).
lead_([H|T], L) :-
    if_(H \= 0,
        L = [H|T],
        lead_(T,L)).

The initial check for nonvar(L) is the only solution I have been able to come up with that would prevent problems with e.g. lead(L0, [0,1,2,3]), while retaining the behavior of the predicate in all other situations.

This uses if_/3, part of library(reif)

if_(If_1, Then_0, Else_0) :-
    call(If_1, T),
    (  T == true -> Then_0
    ;  T == false -> Else_0
    ;  nonvar(T) -> throw(error(type_error(boolean,T),
                                type_error(call(If_1,T),2,boolean,T)))
    ;  throw(error(instantiation_error,instantiation_error(call(If_1,T),2)))
    ).

This also uses (\=)/3, that I came up with by simple modification of (=)/3 in library(reif).

\=(X, Y, T) :-
    (   X \= Y -> T = true
    ;   X == Y -> T = false
    ;   T = true, dif(X, Y)
    ;   T = false,
        X = Y
    ).

Some queries

?- lead([0,0,0,1,2,0,3],L).              % No choice point
L = [1, 2, 0, 3].


?- lead([1,2,0,3],L).
L = [1, 2, 0, 3].


?- lead([0,0,0,0],L).
L = [].


?- lead([],L).
L = [].


?- lead(L0,[0,1,2,0,3]).                 % Correctly fails
false.


?- lead(L0,[1,2,0,3]).
L0 = [1, 2, 0, 3] ;
L0 = [0, 1, 2, 0, 3] ;
L0 = [0, 0, 1, 2, 0, 3] ;
…


?- lead(L0,L).                           % Exhaustively enumerates all cases:  
L0 = L, L = [] ;                         %   - LO empty
L0 = L, L = [_G2611|_G2612],             %   - L0 contains no leading 0
dif(_G2611, 0) ;
L0 = [0],                                %   - L0 = [0]
L = [] ;
L0 = [0, _G2629|_G2630],                 %   - L0 contains one leading 0
L = [_G2629|_G2630],
dif(_G2629, 0) ;
L0 = [0, 0],                             %   - L0 = [0, 0]
L = [] ;
L0 = [0, 0, _G2647|_G2648],              %   - L0 contains two leading 0s
L = [_G2647|_G2648],
dif(_G2647, 0) ;
…                                        %   etc.

Answer 4

Here is a solution that doesn't generate any choice points. Its using freeze/2, in a way that is not anticipated by dif/2. But using freeze/2 here is quite appropriate, since one rule of thumb for freeze/2 is as follows:

Rule of Thumb for freeze/2: Use freeze/2 where the predicate would generate uninstantiated solutions and a lot of choice points. The hope is that a subsequent goal will specify the solution more, and the freeze/2 will be woken up. Unfortunately doesn't work with CLP(FD) or dif/2, since freeze/2 does not react to refinements implied by CLP(FD) or dif/2, only unification will wake it up.

The code is thus:

lead(X, Y) :- var(X), !, freeze(X, lead(X,Y)).
lead([X|Y], Z) :- var(X), !, freeze(X, lead([X|Y],Z)).
lead([0|X], Y) :- !, lead(X, Y).
lead(X, X).

Here are some sample runs (SWI-Prolog without some import, Jekejeke Prolog use Minlog Extension and ?- use_module(library(term/suspend))):

?- lead([0,0,0,1,2,3], X).
X = [1, 2, 3].

?- lead([0,0|X], Y).
freeze(X, lead(X, Y)).

?- lead([0,0|X], Y), X = [0,1,2,3].
X = [0, 1, 2, 3],
Y = [1, 2, 3].

?- lead([Z,0|X], Y), X = [0,1,2,3].
X = [0, 1, 2, 3],
freeze(Z, lead([Z, 0, 0, 1, 2, 3], Y)).

?- lead([Z,0|X], Y), X = [0,1,2,3], Z = 0.
Z = 0,
X = [0, 1, 2, 3],
Y = [1, 2, 3].

In the above lead/2 implemetation only the first argument is handled. To handle multiple arguments simultaneously the predicate when/2 can be used. But for simplicity this is not shown here.

Also when using suspended goals, one might need a labeling like predicate at the end, since suspended goals cannot detect inconsistency among them.

Answer 5

The problem in your code is that the second parameter, your output, is specified as _, so your predicate is true for any output. What you want is a predicate that is true if and only if it is the input minus leading zeroes.

lead([], []).
lead([0 | Tail], Tail2) :- !, lead(Tail, Tail2).
lead([Head | Tail], [Head | Tail]) :- Head =\= 0.

The ! in the first line is optional. It prunes the search tree so Prolog does not consider the second line (which would fail) if the first line matches.

Answer 6

Here's how I'd phrase it. First, establish constraints: either X or Y must be bound to a list. Anything else fails.

• If X is bound, we don't care about Y: it can be bound or unbound. We just strip any leading zeros from X and unify the results with Y. This path has a single possible solution.

• If X is unbound and Y is bound, we shift into generative mode. This path has an infinite number of possible solutions.

The code:

strip_leading_zeros(X,Y) :- listish(X), !, rmv0( X , Y ) .
strip_leading_zeros(X,Y) :- listish(Y), !, add0( Y , X ) .

rmv0( []     , [] ) .
rmv0( [D|Ds] , R  ) :- D \= 0 -> R = [D|Ds] ; rmv0(Ds,R) .

add0( X , X ) .
add0( X , Y ) :- add0([0|X],Y ) .

listish/1 is a simple shallow test for listish-ness. Use is_list/1 if you want to be pedantic about things.

listish( L     ) :- var(L), !, fail.
listish( []    ) .
listish( [_|_] ) .

Edited to note: is_list/1 traverses the entire list to ensure that it is testing is a properly constructed list, that is, a ./2 term, whose right-hand child is itself either another ./2 term or the atom [] (which denotes the empty list). If the list is long, this can be an expensive operation.

So, something like [a,b,c] is a proper list and is actually this term: .(a,.(b,.(c,[]))). Something like [a,b|32] is not a proper list: it is the term .(a,.(b,32)).