Results 1 
5 of
5
HOL Light Tutorial (for version 2.20
, 2006
"... The HOL Light theorem prover can be difficult to get started with. While the manual is fairly detailed and comprehensive, the large amount of background information that has to be absorbed before the user can do anything interesting is intimidating. Here we give an alternative ‘quick start ’ guide, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The HOL Light theorem prover can be difficult to get started with. While the manual is fairly detailed and comprehensive, the large amount of background information that has to be absorbed before the user can do anything interesting is intimidating. Here we give an alternative ‘quick start ’ guide, aimed at teaching basic use of the system quickly by means of a graded set of examples. Some readers may find it easier to absorb; those who do not are referred after all to the standard manual. “Shouldn’t we read the instructions?”
Proving bounds for real linear programs in isabelle/HOL (Extended Abstract)
 THEOREM PROVING IN HIGHER ORDER LOGICS (TPHOLS 2005), VOLUME 3603 OF LECT. NOTES IN COMP. SCI
, 2005
"... The Flyspeck project [3] has as its goal the complete formalization of Hales’ proof [2] of the Kepler conjecture. The formalization has to be carried out within a mechanical theorem prover. For our work described in this paper, we have chosen the generic proof assistant Isabelle, tailored to Higher ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The Flyspeck project [3] has as its goal the complete formalization of Hales’ proof [2] of the Kepler conjecture. The formalization has to be carried out within a mechanical theorem prover. For our work described in this paper, we have chosen the generic proof assistant Isabelle, tailored to HigherOrder Logic (HOL) [4]. In the following, we will refer to this environment as Isabelle/HOL. An important step in Hales ’ proof is the maximization of about 10 5 real linear programs. The size of these linear programs (LPs) varies, the largest among them consist of about 2000 inequalities in about 200 variables. The considered LPs have the important property that there exist a priori bounds on the range of the variables. The situation is further simplified by our attitude towards the linear programs: we only want to know wether the objective function of a given LP is bounded from above by a given constant K. Under these assumptions, Hales describes [1] a method for obtaining an arbitrarily precise upper bound for the maximum value of the objective function of an LP. This method still works nicely in the context of mechanical theorem
Applications of Polytypism in Theorem Proving
 2758 in LNCS
, 2003
"... Abstract. Polytypic functions have mainly been studied in the context of functional programming languages. In that setting, applications of polytypism include elegant treatments of polymorphic equality, prettyprinting, and the encoding and decoding of highlevel datatypes to and from lowlevel binar ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Polytypic functions have mainly been studied in the context of functional programming languages. In that setting, applications of polytypism include elegant treatments of polymorphic equality, prettyprinting, and the encoding and decoding of highlevel datatypes to and from lowlevel binary formats. In this paper, we discuss how polytypism supports some aspects of theorem proving: automated termination proofs of recursive functions, incorporation of the results of metalanguage evaluation, and equivalencepreserving translation to a lowlevel format suitable for propositional methods. The approach is based on an interpretation of higher order logic types as terms, and easily deals with mutual and nested recursive types. 1
HOL Light Tutorial (for version 2.20). http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/ jrh13/hollight/tutorial 220.pdf
"... The HOL Light theorem prover can be difficult to get started with. While the manual is fairly detailed and comprehensive, the large amount of background information that has to be absorbed before the user can do anything interesting is intimidating. Here we give an alternative ‘quick start ’ guide, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The HOL Light theorem prover can be difficult to get started with. While the manual is fairly detailed and comprehensive, the large amount of background information that has to be absorbed before the user can do anything interesting is intimidating. Here we give an alternative ‘quick start ’ guide, aimed at teaching basic use of the system quickly by means of a graded set of examples. Some readers may find it easier to absorb; those who do not are referred after all to the standard manual. “Shouldn’t we read the instructions?”
The K combinator as a semantically transparent tagging mechanism
, 2002
"... The K combinator provides a semantically transparent tagging mechanism which is useful in various aspects of mechanizing higher order logic. Our examples include: numerals, normalization procedures, named hypotheses in goaldirected proof, and rewriting directives. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The K combinator provides a semantically transparent tagging mechanism which is useful in various aspects of mechanizing higher order logic. Our examples include: numerals, normalization procedures, named hypotheses in goaldirected proof, and rewriting directives.