This paper explains the design and use of two equational proving tools, namely an inductive theorem prover -- to prove theorems about equational specifications with an initial algebra semantics -- and a Church-Rosser checker---to check whether such specifications satisfy the Church-Rosser property. These tools can be used to prove properties of order-sorted equational specifications in Cafe [11] and of membership equational logic specifications in Maude [7, 6]. The tools have been written entirely in Maude and are in fact executable specifications in rewriting logic of the formal inference systems that they implement.

Equational presentations with ordered sorts encompass partially defined functions and subtyping information in an algebraic framework. In this work we address the problem of computing in order-sorted algebras, with very few restrictions on the allowed presentations. We adopt an algebraic framework where equational, membership and existence formulas can be expressed. A complete deduction calculus is provided to incorporate the interaction between all these formulas. The notion of decorated terms is proposed to memorize local sort information, dynamically changed by a rewriting process. A completion procedure for equational presentations with ordered sorts computes a set of rewrite rules with which not only equational theorems of the form (t = t 0 ), but also typing theorems of the for...

Solving goals—like deciding word problems or resolving constraints—is much easier in some theory presentations than in others. What have been called “completion processes”, in particular in the study of equational logic, involve finding appropriate presentations of a given theory to solve easily a given class of problems. We provide a general proof-theoretic setting within which completion-like processes can be modelled and studied. This framework centers around well-founded orderings of proofs. It allows for abstract definitions and very general characterizations of saturation processes and redundancy criteria.

This document explains the design and use of a termination checker tool and of a Knuth-Bendix completion tool. The termination checker tool checks whether an equational specication terminates, and the Knuth-Bendix completion tool tries to complete an equational speci- cation. These tools can be used to prove the termination or to complete order-sorted equational specications in Maude [7, 6, 4]. The tools have been written entirely in Maude and are in fact executable specications in rewriting logic [17] of the formal inference system that they implement. The fact that rewriting logic is reective [8, 3], and that Maude eciently supports reective rewriting logic computations [5, 4] is systematically exploited in the design of the tools. Contents 1

Narrowing is a way to integrate function evaluation and equality definition into logic programming. Here we show how this can be combined with the constraint paradigm. We propose a solver for goals with constraints in theories defined by unconstrained equalities and rewrite rules with constraints expressed in an algebraic built-in structure. The narrowing method reduces the goal solving problem in the whole theory to rewriting and constraint solving in an adequate combined theory. The combined solver is obtained through the combination of a solver in the built-in structure and a solver for the unconstrained equalities. Sufficient syntactic conditions are proposed to get a process that enumerates a complete set of solutions. 1 Introduction Narrowing provides integration of function evaluation and equality definition into logic programming [6, 12, 8, 18, 10]. In this work, we show how this can be connected with the constraint paradigm to get a constraint solver on combined algebraic dom...

In an algebraic framework, where equational, membership and existence formulas can be expressed, decorated terms and rewriting provide operational semantics and decision procedures for these formulas. We focus in this work on testing sort inheritance, an undecidable property of specifications, needed for unification in this context. A test and three specific processes, based on completion of a set of rewrite rules, are proposed to check sort inheritance. They depend on the kinds of membership formulas (t : A) allowed in the specifications: flat and linear, shallow and general terms t are studied.

We consider the problem of proving termination of ordersorted rewrite systems. The dominating method for proving termination of order-sorted systems has been to simply ignore sort information, and use the techniques developed for unsorted rewriting. The problem with this approach is that many order-sorted rewrite systems terminate because of the structure of the set of sorts. In these cases the corresponding unsorted system would not terminate. In this paper we approach the problem of order-sorted termination by mapping the order-sorted rewrite system into an unsorted one suchthat termination of the latter implies termination of the former. By encoding sort information into the unsorted mapping, we are able to use general purpose termination orderings to prove termination of order-sorted rewrite systems whose termination depend on the sort hierarchy. We present a sequence of gradually stronger methods, and show that a previously published method is contained in ours as a special case. 1

Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.5.4 Special Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.6 Semantics of Programming Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.1 Semantics of Ada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.2 Action Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.7 Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.1 Early Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.2 Recent Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.7.3 The Common Framework Initiative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5 Methodology 57 5.1 Development Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.1.1 Applica...