Results 1 
6 of
6
A Metatheory of a Mechanized Object Theory
, 1994
"... In this paper we propose a metatheory, MT which represents the computation which implements its object theory, OT, and, in particular, the computation which implements deduction in OT. To emphasize this fact we say that MT is a metatheory of a mechanized object theory. MT has some "unusual" prope ..."
Abstract

Cited by 22 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we propose a metatheory, MT which represents the computation which implements its object theory, OT, and, in particular, the computation which implements deduction in OT. To emphasize this fact we say that MT is a metatheory of a mechanized object theory. MT has some "unusual" properties, e.g. it explicitly represents failure in the application of inference rules, and the fact that large amounts of the code implementing OT are partial, i.e. they work only for a limited class of inputs. These properties allow us to use MT to express and prove tactics, i.e. expressions which specify how to compose possibly failing applications of inference rules, to interpret them procedurally to assert theorems in OT, to compile them into the system implementation code, and, finally, to generate MT automatically from the system code. The definition of MT is part of a larger project which aims at the implementation of selfreflective systems, i.e. systems which are able to intros...
Program Tactics and Logic Tactics
 IN PROCEEDINGS 5TH INTNL. CONFERENCE ON LOGIC PROGRAMMING AND AUTOMATED REASONING (LPAR'94
, 1994
"... In this paper we present a first order classical metatheory, called MT, with the following properties: (1) tactics are terms of the language of MT (we call these tactics, Logic Tactics); (2) there exists a mapping between Logic Tactics and the tactics developed as programs within the GETFOL theor ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we present a first order classical metatheory, called MT, with the following properties: (1) tactics are terms of the language of MT (we call these tactics, Logic Tactics); (2) there exists a mapping between Logic Tactics and the tactics developed as programs within the GETFOL theorem prover (we call these tactics, Program Tactics). MT is expressive enough to represent the most interesting tacticals, i.e. then, orelse, try, progress and repeat. repeat allows us to express Logic Tactics which correspond to Program Tactics which may not terminate. This work is part of a larger project which aims at the development and mechanization of a metatheory which can be used to reason about, extend and, possibly, modify the code implementing Program Tactics and the GETFOL basic inference rules.
Program verification
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1985
"... Computer programs may be regarded as formal mathematical objects whose properties are subject to mathematical proof. Program verification is the use of formal, mathematical techniques to debug software and software specifications. 1. Code Verification How are the properties of computer programs prov ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Computer programs may be regarded as formal mathematical objects whose properties are subject to mathematical proof. Program verification is the use of formal, mathematical techniques to debug software and software specifications. 1. Code Verification How are the properties of computer programs proved? We discuss three approaches in this article: inductive invariants, functional semantics, and explicit semantics. Because the first approach has received by far the most attention, it has produced the most impressive results to date. However, the field is now moving away from the inductive invariant approach. 1.1. Inductive Assertions The socalled FloydHoare inductive assertion method of program verification [25, 33] has its roots in the classic Goldstine and von Neumann reports [53] and handles the usual kind of programming language, of which FORTRAN is perhaps the best example. In this style of verification, the specifier "annotates " certain points in the program with mathematical assertions that are supposed to describe relations that hold between the program variables and the initial input values each time "control " reaches the annotated point. Among these assertions are some that characterize acceptable input and the desired output. By exploring all possible paths from one assertion to the next and analyzing the effects of intervening program statements it is possible to reduce the correctness of the program to the problem of proving certain derived formulas called verification conditions. Below we illustrate the idea with a simple program for computing the factorial of its integer input N flowchart assertion start with input(N) input N A: = 1 N = 0 yes stop with? answer A
Towards provably correct system synthesis and extension
 JOURNAL OF FUTURE GENERATION COMPUTER SYSTEMS
, 1996
"... Our ultimate goal is to define a framework and a methodology which will allow users to construct or extend complex reasoning systems in such a way that the correctness of the resulting system is guaranteed. Our approach is based on the following principles: (i) construct the prover according to cert ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Our ultimate goal is to define a framework and a methodology which will allow users to construct or extend complex reasoning systems in such a way that the correctness of the resulting system is guaranteed. Our approach is based on the following principles: (i) construct the prover according to certain general (but precise) criteria, in particular maintain a sharp distinction among the logical, control, and interaction components; (ii) use a uniform framework to specify these three levels; (iii) represent (selected parts of) the code in a classical first order theory, use the inference capabilities of the system to reason deductively about this theory, and, as a result, synthesize new code which can be pushed back in the underlying implementation. This paper describes the approach, what we have done so far and how we intend to proceed to pursue our ultimate goal.
THE SEMANTICS OF DESTRUCTIVE LISPCSLI Lecture Notes Number 5 THE SEMANTICS OF DESTRUCTIVE LISP
"... AND INFORMATIONCSLI was founded early in 1983 by researchers from Stanford University, SRI International, and Xerox PARC to further research and development of integrated theories of language, information, and computation. CSLI headquarters and the publication offices are located at the Stanford sit ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
AND INFORMATIONCSLI was founded early in 1983 by researchers from Stanford University, SRI International, and Xerox PARC to further research and development of integrated theories of language, information, and computation. CSLI headquarters and the publication offices are located at the Stanford site.