Results 1  10
of
13
Metatheory and Reflection in Theorem Proving: A Survey and Critique
, 1995
"... One way to ensure correctness of the inference performed by computer theorem provers is to force all proofs to be done step by step in a simple, more or less traditional, deductive system. Using techniques pioneered in Edinburgh LCF, this can be made palatable. However, some believe such an appro ..."
Abstract

Cited by 53 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
One way to ensure correctness of the inference performed by computer theorem provers is to force all proofs to be done step by step in a simple, more or less traditional, deductive system. Using techniques pioneered in Edinburgh LCF, this can be made palatable. However, some believe such an approach will never be efficient enough for large, complex proofs. One alternative, commonly called reflection, is to analyze proofs using a second layer of logic, a metalogic, and so justify abbreviating or simplifying proofs, making the kinds of shortcuts humans often do or appealing to specialized decision algorithms. In this paper we contrast the fullyexpansive LCF approach with the use of reflection. We put forward arguments to suggest that the inadequacy of the LCF approach has not been adequately demonstrated, and neither has the practical utility of reflection (notwithstanding its undoubted intellectual interest). The LCF system with which we are most concerned is the HOL proof ...
Dependent choices, ‘quote’ and the clock
 Th. Comp. Sc
, 2003
"... When using the CurryHoward correspondence in order to obtain executable programs from mathematical proofs, we are faced with a difficult problem: to interpret each axiom of our axiom system for mathematics (which may be, for example, second order classical logic, or classical set theory) as an inst ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
When using the CurryHoward correspondence in order to obtain executable programs from mathematical proofs, we are faced with a difficult problem: to interpret each axiom of our axiom system for mathematics (which may be, for example, second order classical logic, or classical set theory) as an instruction of our programming language. This problem
On the NoCounterexample Interpretation
 J. SYMBOLIC LOGIC
, 1997
"... In [15],[16] Kreisel introduced the nocounterexample interpretation (n.c.i.) of Peano arithmetic. In particular he proved, using a complicated "substitution method (due to W. Ackermann), that for every theorem A (A prenex) of firstorder Peano arithmetic PA one can find ordinal recursive functi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In [15],[16] Kreisel introduced the nocounterexample interpretation (n.c.i.) of Peano arithmetic. In particular he proved, using a complicated "substitution method (due to W. Ackermann), that for every theorem A (A prenex) of firstorder Peano arithmetic PA one can find ordinal recursive functionals \Phi A of order type ! " 0 which realize the Herbrand normal form A of A. Subsequently more
Proof Interpretations and the Computational Content of Proofs. Draft of book in preparation
, 2007
"... This survey reports on some recent developments in the project of applying proof theory to proofs in core mathematics. The historical roots, however, go back to Hilbert’s central theme in the foundations of mathematics which can be paraphrased by the following question ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This survey reports on some recent developments in the project of applying proof theory to proofs in core mathematics. The historical roots, however, go back to Hilbert’s central theme in the foundations of mathematics which can be paraphrased by the following question
Ordinals and Interactive Programs
, 2000
"... The work reported in this thesis arises from the old idea, going back to the origins of constructive logic, that a proof is fundamentally a kind of program. If proofs can be ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The work reported in this thesis arises from the old idea, going back to the origins of constructive logic, that a proof is fundamentally a kind of program. If proofs can be
The proof theory of classical and constructive inductive definitions. A 40 year saga, 19682008.
, 2008
"... ..."
System T and the Product of Selection Functions
"... We show that the finite product of selection functions (for all finite types) is primitive recursively equivalent to Gödel’s highertype recursor (for all finite types). The correspondence is shown to hold for similar restricted fragments of both systems: The recursor for type level n 1 is primitive ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We show that the finite product of selection functions (for all finite types) is primitive recursively equivalent to Gödel’s highertype recursor (for all finite types). The correspondence is shown to hold for similar restricted fragments of both systems: The recursor for type level n 1 is primitive recursively equivalent to the finite product of selection functions of type level n. Whereas the recursor directly interprets induction, we show that other classical arithmetical principles such as bounded collection and finite choice are more naturally interpreted via the product of selection functions.
Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic The Computational Content of Arithmetical Proofs
"... Abstract For any extension T of IΣ1 having a cutelimination property extending that of IΣ1, the number of different proofs that can be obtained by cutelimination from a single Tproof cannot be bound by a function which is provably total in T. 1 ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract For any extension T of IΣ1 having a cutelimination property extending that of IΣ1, the number of different proofs that can be obtained by cutelimination from a single Tproof cannot be bound by a function which is provably total in T. 1