In Prolog DCGs, how to remove over general solutions? - prolog

Question

I have a text file containing a sequence. For example:
GGGGGGGGAACCCCCCCCCCTTGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGAACCCCCCCCCCTTGGGGGGGG
I have wrote the following DCG to find the sequence between AA and TT.
:- use_module(library(pio)).
:- use_module(library(dcg/basics)).
:- portray_text(true).
process(Xs) :- phrase_from_file(find(Xs), 'string.txt').
anyseq([]) -->[].
anyseq([E|Es]) --> [E], anyseq(Es).
begin --> "AA".
end -->"TT".
find(Seq) -->
anyseq(_),begin,anyseq(Seq),end, anyseq(_).
I query and I get:
?- process(Xs).
Xs = "CCCCCCCCCC" ;
Xs = "CCCCCCCCCCTTGGGGGGGGGGGGG...CCCCC" ;
Xs = "CCCCCCCCCC" ;
false.
But I dont want it to find the second solution or ones like it. Only the solutions between one pair of AA and TTs not all combinations. I have a feeling I could use string_without and string in library dcg basiscs but I dont understand how to use them.

Answer 1

your anyseq//1 is identical to string//1 from library(dcg/basics), and shares the same 'problem'.
To keep in control, I would introduce a 'between separators' state:
elem(E) --> begin, string(E), end, !.
begin --> "AA".
end -->"TT".
find(Seq) -->
anyseq(_),elem(Seq).
anyseq([]) -->[].
anyseq([E|Es]) --> [E], anyseq(Es).
process(Xs) :-
phrase(find(Xs), `GGGGGGGGAACCCCCCCCCCTTGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGAACCCCC+++CCCCCTTGGGGGGGG`,_).
now I get
?- process(X).
X = "CCCCCCCCCC" ;
X = "CCCCC+++CCCCC" ;
false.
note the anonymous var as last argument of phrase/3: it's needed to suit the change in 'control flow' induced by the more strict pattern used: elem//1 is not followed by anyseq//1, because any two sequences 'sharing' anyseq//1 would be problematic.
In the end, you should change your grammar to collect elem//1 with a right recursive grammar....

Answer 2

First, let me suggest that you most probably misrepresent the problem, at least if this is about mRNA-sequences. There, bases occur in triplets, or codons and the start is methionine or formlymethionine, but the end are three different triplets. So most probably you want to use such a representation.
The sequence in between might be defined using all_seq//2, if_/3, (=)/3:
mRNAseq(Cs) -->
[methionine],
all_seq(\C^maplist(dif(C),[amber,ochre,opal]), Cs),
( [amber] | [ochre] | [opal]).
or:
mRNAseq(Cs) -->
[methionine],
all_seq(list_without([amber,ochre,opal]), Cs),
( [amber] | [ochre] | [opal]).
list_without(Xs, E) :-
maplist(dif(E), Xs).
But back to your literal statement, and your question about declarative names. anyseq and seq mean essentially the same.
% :- set_prolog_flag(double_quotes, codes). % pick this
:- set_prolog_flag(double_quotes, chars). % or pick that
... --> [] | [_], ... .
seq([]) -->
[].
seq([E|Es]) -->
[E],
seq(Es).
mRNAcontent(Cs) -->
...,
"AA",
seq(Cs),
"TT",
{no_TT(Cs)}, % restriction
... .
no_TT([]).
no_TT([E|Es0]) :-
if([E] = "T",
( Es0 = [F|Es], dif([F],"T") ),
Es0 = Es),
no_TT(Es).
The meaning of no_TT/1 is: There is no sequence "TT" in the list, nor a "T" at then end. So no_TT("T") fails as well, for it might collide with the subsequent "TT"!
So why is it a good idea to use pure, monotonic definitions? You will most probably be tempted to add restrictions. In a pure monotonic form, restrictions are harmless. But in the procedural version suggested in another answer, you will get simply different results that are no restrictions at all.