Results 1 
5 of
5
Automating the Meta Theory of Deductive Systems
, 2000
"... not be interpreted as representing the o cial policies, either expressed or implied, of NSF or the U.S. Government. This thesis describes the design of a metalogical framework that supports the representation and veri cation of deductive systems, its implementation as an automated theorem prover, a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 79 (16 self)
 Add to MetaCart
not be interpreted as representing the o cial policies, either expressed or implied, of NSF or the U.S. Government. This thesis describes the design of a metalogical framework that supports the representation and veri cation of deductive systems, its implementation as an automated theorem prover, and experimental results related to the areas of programming languages, type theory, and logics. Design: The metalogical framework extends the logical framework LF [HHP93] by a metalogic M + 2. This design is novel and unique since it allows higherorder encodings of deductive systems and induction principles to coexist. On the one hand, higherorder representation techniques lead to concise and direct encodings of programming languages and logic calculi. Inductive de nitions on the other hand allow the formalization of properties about deductive systems, such as the proof that an operational semantics preserves types or the proof that a logic is is a proof calculus whose proof terms are recursive functions that may be consistent.M +
Structural Cut Elimination
 Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
, 1995
"... We present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic, classical, and linear sequent calculi. In all cases the proofs proceed by three nested structural inductions, avoiding the explicit use of multisets and termination measures on sequent derivations. This makes them amenable to elegant and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 64 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic, classical, and linear sequent calculi. In all cases the proofs proceed by three nested structural inductions, avoiding the explicit use of multisets and termination measures on sequent derivations. This makes them amenable to elegant and concise implementations in Elf, a constraint logic programming language based on the LF logical framework. 1 Introduction Gentzen's sequent calculi [Gen35] for intuitionistic and classical logic have been the central tool in many prooftheoretical investigations and applications of logic in computer science such as logic programming or automated theorem proving. The central property of sequent calculi is cut elimination (Gentzen's Hauptsatz) which yields consistency of the logic as a corollary. The algorithm for cut elimination may be interpreted computationally, similarly to the way normalization for natural deduction may be viewed as functional computation. For the case of linear logic, ...
Structural Cut Elimination  I. Intuitionistic and Classical Logic
 Information and Computation
, 2000
"... this paper we present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic and classical sequent calculi and give their representations in the logical framework LF [HHP93] as implemented in the Elf system [Pfe91]. Multisets are avoided altogether in these proofs, and termination measures are replaced b ..."
Abstract

Cited by 52 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper we present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic and classical sequent calculi and give their representations in the logical framework LF [HHP93] as implemented in the Elf system [Pfe91]. Multisets are avoided altogether in these proofs, and termination measures are replaced by three nested structural inductions. Parameters are treated as variables bound in derivations, thus naturally capturing occurrence conditions. A starting point for the proofs is Kleene's sequent system G 3 [Kle52], which we derive systematically from the point of view that a sequent calculus should be a calculus of proof search for natural deductions. It can easily be related to Gentzen's original and other sequent calculi. We augment G 3 with proof terms that are stable under weakening. These proof terms enable the structural induction and furthermore form the basis of the representation of the proof in LF. The most closely related work on cut elimination is MartinLo# f 's proof of admissibility [ML68]. In MartinLo# f 's system the cut rule incorporates aspects of both weakening and contraction which enables a structural induction argument closely related to ours. However, without the introduction of proof terms, the implicit weakening in the cut rule makes it difficult to implement this proof directly. Herbelin [Her95] restates this proof and proceeds by assigning proof terms only to restricted sequent calculi LJT and LKT which correspond more immediately to
Automated Theorem Proving in a Simple MetaLogic for LF
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 15TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AUTOMATED DEDUCTION (CADE15
, 1998
"... Higherorder representation techniques allow elegant encodings of logics and programming languages in the logical framework LF, but unfortunately they are fundamentally incompatible with induction principles needed to reason about them. In this paper we develop a metalogic M_2 which allows i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 35 (16 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Higherorder representation techniques allow elegant encodings of logics and programming languages in the logical framework LF, but unfortunately they are fundamentally incompatible with induction principles needed to reason about them. In this paper we develop a metalogic M_2 which allows inductive reasoning over LF encodings, and describe its implementation in Twelf, a specialpurpose automated theorem prover for properties of logics and programming languages. We have used Twelf to automatically prove a number of nontrivial theorems, including type preservation for MiniML and the deduction theorem for intuitionistic propositional logic.
A Structural Proof of Cut Elimination and Its Representation in a Logical Framework
, 1994
"... We present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic and classical sequent calculi. In both cases the proofs proceed by three nested structural inductions, avoiding the explicit use of multisets and termination measures on sequent derivations. This makes them amenable to elegant and concise r ..."
Abstract

Cited by 17 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present new proofs of cut elimination for intuitionistic and classical sequent calculi. In both cases the proofs proceed by three nested structural inductions, avoiding the explicit use of multisets and termination measures on sequent derivations. This makes them amenable to elegant and concise representations in LF, which are given in full detail. This work was supported by NSF Grant CCR9303383 The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the author and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of NSF or the U.S. government. Keywords: Logic, Cut Elimination, Logical Framework Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Intuitionistic Sequent Calculus 2 3 Proof Terms for the Sequent Calculus 8 4 Representing Sequent Derivations in LF 10 5 Admissibility of Cut 13 6 Extension to Classical Logic 18 7 Conclusion 24 A Detailed Admissibility Proofs for Cut 26 A.1 Intuitionistic Calculus : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :...