Results 11  20
of
70
Logics and Type Systems
, 1993
"... from the last declaration in \Delta (which is p:'). (oeE) In fact the ([\Theta]) is not exactly the ([\Theta]) that is found by induction. Possibly some of the free variables in ([\Theta]) are renamed. What happens is the following: 1. Consider the proofcontext \Delta 1 ] \Delta 2 and especially ..."
Abstract

Cited by 84 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
from the last declaration in \Delta (which is p:'). (oeE) In fact the ([\Theta]) is not exactly the ([\Theta]) that is found by induction. Possibly some of the free variables in ([\Theta]) are renamed. What happens is the following: 1. Consider the proofcontext \Delta 1 ] \Delta 2 and especially the renaming of the declared variables in \Delta 2 that has been caused by the operation ]. 2. Rename the free proofvariables in ([\Theta]) accordingly, obtaining say, ([\Theta 0 ]). 3. Apply ([\Sigma]) to ([\Theta 0 ]). (There will in practice be no confusion if we just write ([\Theta]) instead.) Of course the intended meaning is that the judgement below the double lines is derivable if the judgement above the lines is. This will be proved later in Theorem 3.2.8. It should be clear at this point however that there is a onetoone correspondence between the occurrences of ' as a (nondischarged) premise in the deduction and declarations p:' in \Delta. Notation. If for \Sigma a deducti...
Elf: A Language for Logic Definition and Verified Metaprogramming
 In Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
, 1989
"... We describe Elf, a metalanguage for proof manipulation environments that are independent of any particular logical system. Elf is intended for metaprograms such as theorem provers, proof transformers, or type inference programs for programming languages with complex type systems. Elf unifies logic ..."
Abstract

Cited by 77 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe Elf, a metalanguage for proof manipulation environments that are independent of any particular logical system. Elf is intended for metaprograms such as theorem provers, proof transformers, or type inference programs for programming languages with complex type systems. Elf unifies logic definition (in the style of LF, the Edinburgh Logical Framework) with logic programming (in the style of Prolog). It achieves this unification by giving types an operational interpretation, much the same way that Prolog gives certain formulas (Hornclauses) an operational interpretation. Novel features of Elf include: (1) the Elf search process automatically constructs terms that can represent objectlogic proofs, and thus a program need not construct them explicitly, (2) the partial correctness of metaprograms with respect to a given logic can be expressed and proved in Elf itself, and (3) Elf exploits Elliott's unification algorithm for a calculus with dependent types. This research was...
The Theory of LEGO  A Proof Checker for the Extended Calculus of Constructions
, 1994
"... LEGO is a computer program for interactive typechecking in the Extended Calculus of Constructions and two of its subsystems. LEGO also supports the extension of these three systems with inductive types. These type systems can be viewed as logics, and as meta languages for expressing logics, and LEGO ..."
Abstract

Cited by 68 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
LEGO is a computer program for interactive typechecking in the Extended Calculus of Constructions and two of its subsystems. LEGO also supports the extension of these three systems with inductive types. These type systems can be viewed as logics, and as meta languages for expressing logics, and LEGO is intended to be used for interactively constructing proofs in mathematical theories presented in these logics. I have developed LEGO over six years, starting from an implementation of the Calculus of Constructions by G erard Huet. LEGO has been used for problems at the limits of our abilities to do formal mathematics. In this thesis I explain some aspects of the metatheory of LEGO's type systems leading to a machinechecked proof that typechecking is decidable for all three type theories supported by LEGO, and to a verified algorithm for deciding their typing judgements, assuming only that they are normalizing. In order to do this, the theory of Pure Type Systems (PTS) is extended and f...
Subtyping Dependent Types
, 2000
"... The need for subtyping in typesystems with dependent types has been realized for some years. But it is hard to prove that systems combining the two features have fundamental properties such as subject reduction. Here we investigate a subtyping extension of the system *P, which is an abstract versio ..."
Abstract

Cited by 68 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The need for subtyping in typesystems with dependent types has been realized for some years. But it is hard to prove that systems combining the two features have fundamental properties such as subject reduction. Here we investigate a subtyping extension of the system *P, which is an abstract version of the type system of the Edinburgh Logical Framework LF. By using an equivalent formulation, we establish some important properties of the new system *P^, including subject reduction. Our analysis culminates in a complete and terminating algorithm which establishes the decidability of typechecking.
OracleBased Checking of Untrusted Software
, 2001
"... We present a variant of ProofCarrying Code (PCC) in which the trusted inference rules are represented as a higherorder logic program, the proof checker is replaced by a nondeterministic higherorder logic interpreter and the proof by an oracle implemented as a stream of bits that resolve the nondet ..."
Abstract

Cited by 55 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a variant of ProofCarrying Code (PCC) in which the trusted inference rules are represented as a higherorder logic program, the proof checker is replaced by a nondeterministic higherorder logic interpreter and the proof by an oracle implemented as a stream of bits that resolve the nondeterministic interpretation choices. In this setting, ProofCarrying Code allows the receiver of the code the luxury of using nondeterminism in constructing a simple yet powerful checking procedure. This oraclebased variant of PCC is able to adapt quite naturally to situations when the property being checked is simple or there is a fairly directed search procedure for it. As an example, we demonstrate that if PCC is used to verify type safety of assembly language programs compiled from Java source programs, the oracles that are needed are on the average just 12% of the size of the code, which represents an improvement of a factor of 30 over previous syntactic representations of PCC proofs. ...
Specifying and Implementing Theorem Provers in a HigherOrder Logic Programming Language
, 1989
"... We argue that a logic programming language with a higherorder intuitionistic logic as its foundation can be used both to naturally specify and implement theorem provers. The language extends traditional logic programming languages by replacing firstorder terms with simplytyped λterms, replacing ..."
Abstract

Cited by 46 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We argue that a logic programming language with a higherorder intuitionistic logic as its foundation can be used both to naturally specify and implement theorem provers. The language extends traditional logic programming languages by replacing firstorder terms with simplytyped λterms, replacing firstorder unification with higherorder unification, and allowing implication and universal quantification in queries and the bodies of clauses. Inference rules for a variety of proof systems can be naturally specified in this language. The higherorder features of the language contribute to a concise specification of provisos concerning variable occurrences in formulas and the discharge of assumptions present in many proof systems. In addition, abstraction in metaterms allows the construction of terms representing object level proofs which capture the notions of abstractions found in many proof systems. The operational interpretations of the connectives of the language provide a set of basic search operations which describe goaldirected search for proofs. To emphasize the generality of the metalanguage, we compare it to another general specification language: the Logical Framework (LF). We describe a translation which compiles a specification of a logic in LF to a set of formulas of our metalanguage, and
Inductively Defined Types in the Calculus of Constructions
 IN: PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH CONFERENCE ON THE MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS OF PROGRAMMING SEMANTICS. SPRINGER VERLAG LNCS
, 1989
"... We define the notion of an inductively defined type in the Calculus of Constructions and show how inductively defined types can be represented by closed types. We show that all primitive recursive functionals over these inductively defined types are also representable. This generalizes work by Böhm ..."
Abstract

Cited by 43 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We define the notion of an inductively defined type in the Calculus of Constructions and show how inductively defined types can be represented by closed types. We show that all primitive recursive functionals over these inductively defined types are also representable. This generalizes work by Böhm & Berarducci on synthesis of functions on term algebras in the secondorder polymorphiccalculus (F2). We give several applications of this generalization, including a representation of F2programs in F3, along with a definition of functions reify, reflect, and eval for F2 in F3. We also show how to define induction over inductively defined types and sketch some results that show that the extension of the Calculus of Construction by induction principles does not alter the set of functions in its computational fragment, F!. This is because a proof by induction can be realized by primitive recursion, which is already de nable in F!.
Higherorder abstract syntax in Coq
, 1995
"... The terms of the simplytyped λcalculus can be used to express the higherorder abstract syntax of objects such as logical formulas, proofs, and programs. Support for the manipulation of such objects is provided in several programming languages (e.g. λProlog, Elf). Such languages also provide embed ..."
Abstract

Cited by 41 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The terms of the simplytyped λcalculus can be used to express the higherorder abstract syntax of objects such as logical formulas, proofs, and programs. Support for the manipulation of such objects is provided in several programming languages (e.g. λProlog, Elf). Such languages also provide embedded implication, a tool which is widely used for expressing hypothetical judgments in natural deduction. In this paper, we show how a restricted form of secondorder syntax and embedded implication can be used together with induction in the Coq Proof Development system. We specify typing rules and evaluation for a simple functional language containing only function abstraction and application, and we fully formalize a proof of type soundness in the system. One difficulty we encountered is that expressing the higherorder syntax of an objectlanguage as an inductive type in Coq generates a class of terms that contains more than just those that directly represent objects in the language. We ove...
An Extension to ML to Handle Bound Variables in Data Structures
, 1990
"... Most conventional programming languages have direct methods for representing firstorder terms (say, via concrete datatypes in ML). If it is necessary to represent structures containing bound variables, such as λterms, formulas, types, or proofs, these must first be mapped into firstorder terms, a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 36 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Most conventional programming languages have direct methods for representing firstorder terms (say, via concrete datatypes in ML). If it is necessary to represent structures containing bound variables, such as λterms, formulas, types, or proofs, these must first be mapped into firstorder terms, and then a significant number of auxiliary procedures must be implemented to manage bound variable names, check for free occurrences, do substitution, test for equality modulo alphaconversion, etc. We shall show how the applicative core of the ML programming language can be enhanced so that λterms can be represented more directly and so that the enhanced language, called MLλ, provides a more elegant method of manipulating bound variables within data structures. In fact, the names of bound variables will not be accessible to the MLλ programmer. This extension to ML involves the following: introduction of the new type constructor ’a => ’b for the type of λterms formed by abstracting a parameter of type ’a out of a term of type ’b; a very restricted and simple form of higherorder pattern matching; a method for extending a given data structure with a new constructor; and, a method for extending function definitions to handle such new constructors. We present several examples of MLλ programs.
Labelled Propositional Modal Logics: Theory and Practice
, 1996
"... We show how labelled deductive systems can be combined with a logical framework to provide a natural deduction implementation of a large and wellknown class of propositional modal logics (including K, D, T , B, S4, S4:2, KD45, S5). Our approach is modular and based on a separation between a base lo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show how labelled deductive systems can be combined with a logical framework to provide a natural deduction implementation of a large and wellknown class of propositional modal logics (including K, D, T , B, S4, S4:2, KD45, S5). Our approach is modular and based on a separation between a base logic and a labelling algebra, which interact through a fixed interface. While the base logic stays fixed, different modal logics are generated by plugging in appropriate algebras. This leads to a hierarchical structuring of modal logics with inheritance of theorems. Moreover, it allows modular correctness proofs, both with respect to soundness and completeness for semantics, and faithfulness and adequacy of the implementation. We also investigate the tradeoffs in possible labelled presentations: We show that a narrow interface between the base logic and the labelling algebra supports modularity and provides an attractive prooftheory (in comparision to, e.g., semantic embedding) but limits th...