Results 1 
4 of
4
Rules of definitional reflection
 In Symposium on Logic and Computer Science
, 1993
"... This paper discusses two rules of definitional reflection: The “logical ” version of definitional reflection as used in the extended logic programming language GCLA and the “ω”version of definitional reflection as proposed by Eriksson and Girard. The logical version is a Leftintroduction rule comp ..."
Abstract

Cited by 56 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper discusses two rules of definitional reflection: The “logical ” version of definitional reflection as used in the extended logic programming language GCLA and the “ω”version of definitional reflection as proposed by Eriksson and Girard. The logical version is a Leftintroduction rule completely analogous to the Leftintroduction rules for logical operators in Gentzenstyle sequent systems, whereas the ωversion extends the logical version by a principle related to the ωrule in arithmetic. Correspondingly, the interpretation of free variables differs between the two approaches, resulting in different principles of closure of inference rules under substitution. This difference is crucial for the computational interpretation of definitional reflection. 1
Encoding Transition Systems in Sequent Calculus
 Theoretical Computer Science
, 1996
"... Intuitionistic and linear logics can be used to specify the operational semantics of transition systems in various ways. We consider here two encodings: one uses linear logic and maps states of the transition system into formulas, and the other uses intuitionistic logic and maps states into terms. I ..."
Abstract

Cited by 33 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Intuitionistic and linear logics can be used to specify the operational semantics of transition systems in various ways. We consider here two encodings: one uses linear logic and maps states of the transition system into formulas, and the other uses intuitionistic logic and maps states into terms. In both cases, it is possible to relate transition paths to proofs in sequent calculus. In neither encoding, however, does it seem possible to capture properties, such as simulation and bisimulation, that need to consider all possible transitions or all possible computation paths. We consider augmenting both intuitionistic and linear logics with a proof theoretical treatment of definitions. In both cases, this addition allows proving various judgments concerning simulation and bisimulation (especially for noetherian transition systems). We also explore the use of infinite proofs to reason about infinite sequences of transitions. Finally, combining definitions and induction into sequent calculus proofs makes it possible to reason more richly about properties of transition systems completely within the formal setting of sequent calculus.
Logic Programming, Functional Programming, and Inductive Definitions
 In Extensions of Logic Programming, volume 475 of LNCS
, 1991
"... Machine. It is incomplete due to depthfirst search, but presumably there could be a version using iterative deepening. An ORparallel machine such as DelPhi [12] could support such languages in future. Functions make explicit the granularity for ORparallelism: evaluation is deterministic while sea ..."
Abstract

Cited by 10 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Machine. It is incomplete due to depthfirst search, but presumably there could be a version using iterative deepening. An ORparallel machine such as DelPhi [12] could support such languages in future. Functions make explicit the granularity for ORparallelism: evaluation is deterministic while search is not.
Generalized definitional reflection and the inversion principle
 Logica Universalis
, 2007
"... Abstract. The term inversion principle goes back to Lorenzen who coined it in the early 1950s. It was later used by Prawitz and others to describe the symmetric relationship between introduction and elimination inferences in natural deduction, sometimes also called harmony. In dealing with the inver ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The term inversion principle goes back to Lorenzen who coined it in the early 1950s. It was later used by Prawitz and others to describe the symmetric relationship between introduction and elimination inferences in natural deduction, sometimes also called harmony. In dealing with the invertibility of rules of an arbitrary atomic production system, Lorenzen’s inversion principle has a much wider range than Prawitz’s adaptation to natural deduction,. It is closely related to definitional reflection, which is a principle for reasoning on the basis of rulebased atomic definitions, proposed by Hallnäs and SchroederHeister. After presenting definitional reflection and the inversion principle, it is shown that the inversion principle can be formally derived from definitional reflection, when the latter is viewed as a principle to establish admissibility. Furthermore, the relationship between definitional reflection and the inversion principle is investigated on the background of a universalization principle, called the ωprinciple, which allows one to pass from the set of all defined substitution instances of a sequent to the sequent itself.