Results 1 
8 of
8
Reasoning with higherorder abstract syntax in a logical framework
 ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
, 2002
"... Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 90 (23 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natural to consider proving properties about the specified systems in the framework: for example, given the specification of evaluation for a functional programming language, prove that the language is deterministic or that evaluation preserves types. One challenge in developing a framework for such reasoning is that higherorder abstract syntax (HOAS), an elegant and declarative treatment of objectlevel abstraction and substitution, is difficult to treat in proofs involving induction. In this paper, we present a metalogic that can be used to reason about judgments coded using HOAS; this metalogic is an extension of a simple intuitionistic logic that admits higherorder quantification over simply typed λterms (key ingredients for HOAS) as well as induction and a notion of definition. The latter concept of definition is a prooftheoretic device that allows certain theories to be treated as “closed ” or as defining fixed points. We explore the difficulties of formal metatheoretic analysis of HOAS encodings by considering encodings of intuitionistic and linear logics, and formally derive the admissibility of cut for important subsets
Cutelimination for a logic with definitions and induction
 Theoretical Computer Science
, 1997
"... In order to reason about specifications of computations that are given via the proof search or logic programming paradigm one needs to have at least some forms of induction and some principle for reasoning about the ways in which terms are built and the ways in which computations can progress. The l ..."
Abstract

Cited by 61 (19 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In order to reason about specifications of computations that are given via the proof search or logic programming paradigm one needs to have at least some forms of induction and some principle for reasoning about the ways in which terms are built and the ways in which computations can progress. The literature contains many approaches to formally adding these reasoning principles with logic specifications. We choose an approach based on the sequent calculus and design an intuitionistic logic F Oλ ∆IN that includes natural number induction and a notion of definition. We have detailed elsewhere that this logic has a number of applications. In this paper we prove the cutelimination theorem for F Oλ ∆IN, adapting a technique due to Tait and MartinLöf. This cutelimination proof is technically interesting and significantly extends previous results of this kind. 1
Encoding Transition Systems in Sequent Calculus
 Theoretical Computer Science
, 1996
"... Intuitionistic and linear logics can be used to specify the operational semantics of transition systems in various ways. We consider here two encodings: one uses linear logic and maps states of the transition system into formulas, and the other uses intuitionistic logic and maps states into terms. I ..."
Abstract

Cited by 33 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Intuitionistic and linear logics can be used to specify the operational semantics of transition systems in various ways. We consider here two encodings: one uses linear logic and maps states of the transition system into formulas, and the other uses intuitionistic logic and maps states into terms. In both cases, it is possible to relate transition paths to proofs in sequent calculus. In neither encoding, however, does it seem possible to capture properties, such as simulation and bisimulation, that need to consider all possible transitions or all possible computation paths. We consider augmenting both intuitionistic and linear logics with a proof theoretical treatment of definitions. In both cases, this addition allows proving various judgments concerning simulation and bisimulation (especially for noetherian transition systems). We also explore the use of infinite proofs to reason about infinite sequences of transitions. Finally, combining definitions and induction into sequent calculus proofs makes it possible to reason more richly about properties of transition systems completely within the formal setting of sequent calculus.
CutProperty And Negation As Failure
, 1994
"... What is the semantics of NegationasFailure in logic programming? We try to answer this question by prooftheoretic methods. A rule based sequent calculus is used in which a sequent is provable if, and only if, it is true in all threevalued models of the completion of a logic program. The main the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
What is the semantics of NegationasFailure in logic programming? We try to answer this question by prooftheoretic methods. A rule based sequent calculus is used in which a sequent is provable if, and only if, it is true in all threevalued models of the completion of a logic program. The main theorem is that proofs in the sequent calculus can be transformed into SLDNFcomputations if, and only if, a program has the cutproperty. A fragment of the sequent calculus leads to a sound and complete semantics for SLDNFresolution with substitutions. It turns out that this version of SLDNFresolution is sound and complete with respect to threevalued possible world models of the completion for arbitrary logic programs and arbitrary goals. Since we are dealing with possibly nonterminating computations and constructive proofs, threevalued possible world models seem to be an appropriate semantics.
A Logic for Reasoning with HigherOrder Abstract Syntax
"... Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natural to consider proving properties about the specified systems in the framework: for example, given the specification of evaluation for a functional programming language, prove that the language is deterministic or that the subjectreduction theorem holds. One challenge in developing a framework for such reasoning is that higherorder abstract syntax (HOAS), an elegant and declarative treatment of objectlevel abstraction and substitution,is difficult to treat in proofs involving induction. In this paper, we present a metalogic that can be used to reason about judgments coded using HOAS; this metalogic is an extension of a simple intuitionistic logic that admits higherorder quantification over simply typedterms (key ingredients for HOAS) as well as induction and a notion of definition. The latter concept of a definition is a prooftheoretic device that allows certain theories to be treated as “closed ” or as defining fixed points. The resulting metalogic can specify various logical frameworks and a large range of judgments regarding programming languages and inference systems. We illustrate this point through examples, including the admissibility of cut for a simple logic and subject reduction, determinacy of evaluation, and the equivalence of SOS and natural semantics presentations of evaluation for a simple functional programming language. 1.
January 6, 1998
 Dept. Computer Science, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London
, 1998
"... We define a translation between the language Golog and a fragment of linear logic augmented with definitions; we prove bisimulation for this translation and finally suggest some extensions to Golog motivated by the translation. Contents 0 Preliminaries 2 0.1 Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We define a translation between the language Golog and a fragment of linear logic augmented with definitions; we prove bisimulation for this translation and finally suggest some extensions to Golog motivated by the translation. Contents 0 Preliminaries 2 0.1 Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0.2 Girard's Fixpoint Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 The Basic Representation 4 1.1 Situations and Fluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 A First Attempt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.1.2 The SituationForming Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 Permutabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Representing Situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.2.1 Basic Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.3 Representing Fluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.3.1 The Fluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
Abstract
, 2008
"... Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natu ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Logical frameworks based on intuitionistic or linear logics with highertype quantification have been successfully used to give highlevel, modular, and formal specifications of many important judgments in the area of programming languages and inference systems. Given such specifications, it is natural to consider proving properties about the specified systems in the framework: for example, given the specification of evaluation for a functional programming language, prove that the language is deterministic or that evaluation preserves types. One challenge in developing a framework for such reasoning is that higherorder abstract syntax (HOAS), an elegant and declarative treatment of objectlevel abstraction and substitution, is difficult to treat in proofs involving induction. In this paper, we present a metalogic that can be used to reason about judgments coded using HOAS; this metalogic is an extension of a simple intuitionistic logic that admits higherorder quantification over simply typed λterms (key ingredients for HOAS) as well as induction and a notion of definition. The latter concept of definition is a prooftheoretic device that allows certain theories to be treated as “closed ” or as defining fixed points. We explore the difficulties of formal metatheoretic analysis of HOAS encodings by considering encodings of intuitionistic and linear logics, and formally derive the admissibility of cut for important subsets of these logics. We then propose an approach to avoid the apparent tradeoff between the benefits of higherorder abstract syntax and the ability to analyze the resulting encodings. We illustrate this approach through examples involving the simple functional and imperative programming languages PCF and PCF:=. We formally derive such properties as unicity of typing, subject reduction, determinacy of evaluation, and the equivalence of transition semantics and natural semantics presentations of evaluation.