Results 11  20
of
36
Modularization of Ontologies  WonderWeb: Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web
, 2001
"... ..."
Structuring Metatheory on Inductive Definitions
, 2000
"... We examine a problem for machine supported metatheory. There are statements true about a theory that are true of some (but only some) extensions; however standard theorystructuring facilities do not support selective inheritance. We use the example of the deduction theorem for modal logic and s ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We examine a problem for machine supported metatheory. There are statements true about a theory that are true of some (but only some) extensions; however standard theorystructuring facilities do not support selective inheritance. We use the example of the deduction theorem for modal logic and show how a statement about a theory can explicitly formalize the closure conditions extensions should satisfy for it to remain true. We show how metatheories based on inductive denitions allow theories and general metatheorems to be organized this way, and report on a case study using the theory FS0 . 1 Introduction Hierarchical theory structuring plays an important role in the application of theorem provers to nontrivial problems, and many systems provide support for it. For example HOL [6], Isabelle [13] and their predecessor LCF [7] support simple theory hierarchies. In these systems a theory is a specication of a language, using types and typed constants, and a collection of rules...
Chiron: A set theory with types, undefinedness, quotation, and evaluation
, 2007
"... Chiron is a derivative of vonNeumannBernaysGödel (nbg) set theory that is intended to be a practical, generalpurpose logic for mechanizing mathematics. Unlike traditional set theories such as ZermeloFraenkel (zf) and nbg, Chiron is equipped with a type system, lambda notation, and definite and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Chiron is a derivative of vonNeumannBernaysGödel (nbg) set theory that is intended to be a practical, generalpurpose logic for mechanizing mathematics. Unlike traditional set theories such as ZermeloFraenkel (zf) and nbg, Chiron is equipped with a type system, lambda notation, and definite and indefinite description. The type system includes a universal type, dependent types, dependent function types, subtypes, and possibly empty types. Unlike traditional logics such as firstorder logic and simple type theory, Chiron admits undefined terms that result, for example, from a function applied to an argument outside its domain or from an improper definite or indefinite description. The most noteworthy part of Chiron is its facility for reasoning about the syntax of expressions. Quotation is used to refer to a set called a construction that represents the syntactic structure of an expression, and evaluation is used to refer to the value of the expression that a construction
Proof Script Pragmatics in IMPS
 Automated Deduction CADE12, volume 814 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 1994
"... . This paper introduces the imps proof script mechanism and some practical methods for exploiting it. 1 Introduction imps, an Interactive Mathematical Proof System [4, 2], is intended to serve three ultimate purposes: { To provide mathematics education with a mathematics laboratory for students ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. This paper introduces the imps proof script mechanism and some practical methods for exploiting it. 1 Introduction imps, an Interactive Mathematical Proof System [4, 2], is intended to serve three ultimate purposes: { To provide mathematics education with a mathematics laboratory for students to develop axiomatic theories, proofs, and rigorous methods of symbolic computation. { To provide mathematical research with mechanized support covering a range of concrete and abstract mathematics, eventually with the help of a large theory library of formal mathematics. { To allow applied formal methods to use exible approaches to formalizing problem domains and proof techniques, in showing software or hardware correctness. Thus, the goal of imps is to provide mechanical support for traditional methods and activities of mathematics, and for traditional styles of mathematical proof. Other automated theorem provers may be intended for quite dierent sorts of problems, and they can theref...
Interpretation and Instantiation of Theories for Reasoning about Formal Specifications
 QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
, 1997
"... In this paper an outline is given of an approach to formally reasoning about importation, parameterisation and instantiation of specifications written in a modular extension of the Z language (called Sum). Interpretation and instantiation of theories in first order logic are well understood. We illu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper an outline is given of an approach to formally reasoning about importation, parameterisation and instantiation of specifications written in a modular extension of the Z language (called Sum). Interpretation and instantiation of theories in first order logic are well understood. We illustrate how to use these results directly to provide a framework within which we can soundly and efficiently reason about modular specifications. A reasoning environment within the Ergo 4:1 theorem prover has been constructed that provides the theory management, construction and extension facilities needed to support such a reasoning process. Sum specifications are mapped to the appropriate Ergo structures by a straightforward translation process. A simple example in Sum is presented to demonstrate the use of these theory extension mechanisms. As far as the authors are aware, no other system offers interpreted automated support for reasoning about parameterisation and instantiation of modular...
Evaluating the Interfaces of Three Theorem Proving Assistants
 Proceedings of the 3rd International Eurographics Workshop on Design, Specification, and Verification of Interactive Systems, Eurographics Series
, 1996
"... A first step in systematically engineering better interfaces for theorem proving assistants (TPAs) is to assess what has already been achieved in the domain. We examine three TPAs employing quite different styles of interaction. We consider the support provided by the interfaces for each of four mec ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A first step in systematically engineering better interfaces for theorem proving assistants (TPAs) is to assess what has already been achieved in the domain. We examine three TPAs employing quite different styles of interaction. We consider the support provided by the interfaces for each of four mechanisms for efficient interactive proof: planning, reuse, reflection and articulation. Common themes are observed, as are strengths and weaknesses of the interfaces and we discuss the general issues, attempting to abstract away from the particular artifacts studied. 1 Introduction As formal methods unburden themselves of notions of uniquitous proof, recognition is growing for the value of formal proof in certain areas, for example verifying algorithms, see [7] and exploring properties of complex interactions, see [17]. Furthermore the tools necessary to check and to manage large and complicated proofs are emerging allowing significant proofs to be performed interactively. Such theorem provi...
A tough nut for mathematical knowledge management
 Mathematical Knowledge Management – 4th International Conference, MKM 2005
, 2006
"... Abstract. In this contribution we address two related questions. Firstly, we want to shed light on the question how to use a representation formalism to represent a given problem. Secondly, we want to find out how different formalizations are related and in particular how it is possible to check tha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this contribution we address two related questions. Firstly, we want to shed light on the question how to use a representation formalism to represent a given problem. Secondly, we want to find out how different formalizations are related and in particular how it is possible to check that one formalization entails another. The latter question is a tough nut for mathematical knowledge management systems, since it amounts to the question, how a system can recognize that a solution to a problem is already available, although possibly in disguise. As our starting point we take McCarthy’s 1964 mutilated checkerboard challenge problem for proof procedures and compare some of its different formalizations. 1
Interpretation of locales in Isabelle: Managing dependencies between locales
, 2006
"... Locales are the theory development modules of the Isabelle proof assistant. Interpretation is a powerful technique of theorem reuse which facilitates their automatic transport to other contexts. This paper is concerned with the interpretation of locales in the context of other locales. Our main conc ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Locales are the theory development modules of the Isabelle proof assistant. Interpretation is a powerful technique of theorem reuse which facilitates their automatic transport to other contexts. This paper is concerned with the interpretation of locales in the context of other locales. Our main concern is to make interpretation an effective tool in an interactive proof environment. Interpretation dependencies between locales are maintained explicitly, by means of a development graph, so that theorems proved in one locale can be propagated to other locales that interpret it. Proof tools in Isabelle are controlled by sets of default theorems they use. These sets are required to be finite, but can become infinite in the presence of arbitrary interpretations. We show that finiteness can be maintained.
Locales: a Module System for Mathematical Theories
"... Locales are a module system for managing theory hierarchies in a theorem prover through theory interpretation. They are available for the theorem prover Isabelle. In this paper, their semantics is defined in terms of local theories and morphisms. Locales aim at providing flexible means of extension ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Locales are a module system for managing theory hierarchies in a theorem prover through theory interpretation. They are available for the theorem prover Isabelle. In this paper, their semantics is defined in terms of local theories and morphisms. Locales aim at providing flexible means of extension and reuse. Theory modules (which are called locales) may be extended by definitions and theorems. Interpretation to Isabelle’s global theories and proof contexts is possible via morphisms. Even the locale hierarchy may be changed if declared relations between locales do not adequately reflect logical relations, which are implied by the locales’ specifications. By discussing their design and relating it to more commonly known structuring mechanisms of programming languages and provers, locales are made accessible to a wider audience beyond the users of Isabelle. The discussed mechanisms include MLstyle functors, type classes and mixins (the latter are found in modern objectoriented languages). 1
Reasoning Specialists Should Be Logical Services, Not Black Boxes
 In Proceedings of CADE12 workshop on Theory Reasoning in Automated Deduction
, 1994
"... Introduction An important problem for automated reasoning is to develop mechanisms for integration of special purpose reasoning systems into general purpose reasoning systems, and into other systems. In this abstract we first point out some of the problems to be solved in order to have reasoning mo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Introduction An important problem for automated reasoning is to develop mechanisms for integration of special purpose reasoning systems into general purpose reasoning systems, and into other systems. In this abstract we first point out some of the problems to be solved in order to have reasoning modules that can be effectively integrated, and suggest the notion of a logical service as a way of viewing integrable reasoning modules. We then present some preliminary results from ongoing work aimed at gaining a better understanding of this notion. Finally, we illustrate some of the ideas by describing a series of reasoners specializing in linear arithmetic using the concepts developed. What sort of reasoning components can usefully plug and play? A yes/no type black box decider is not adequate in general. In order for reasoning modules to be usefully integrated they must be able to interact with other components in nontrivial ways. Such modules may need to accept information incr