Dependent types for program termination verification

Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 91-131

  Xi, Hongwei ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Dependent types; Termination

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; FUNCTIONS; HEURISTIC METHODS; INFORMATION SCIENCE; THEOREM PROVING;

PROGRAM TERMINATION VERIFICATION;

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING;

EID: 0036521845     PISSN: 13883690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1019916231463     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Abel, A. and Altenkirch, T. A predicative strong normalisation proof for a λ-calculus with interleaving inductive types. In Proceedings of International Workshop on Types for Proof and Programs (TYPES '99), T. Coquand, P. Dybjer, B. Nordström, and J. Smith (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 1956, Springer-Verlag, 2000, pp. 21-40.
2. BenCherifa, A. and Lescanne, P. Termination of rewriting systems by polynomial interpretations and its implementation. SCP, 9(2) (1987) 137-160.
3. Chang, C.C. and Keisler, H.J. Model Theory, Studies in Logic and Mathematical Foundations, Vol. 73. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1977.
4. Chin, W.-N. and Khoo, S.-C. Calculating sized types. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 14(2/3), to appear.
5. Constable, R.L. et al. Implementing Mathematics with the NuPrl Proof Development System. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1986.
6. Crary, K. and Weirich, S. Resource bound certification. In Proceedings of 27th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 2000), Boston, 2000, pp. 184-198.
7. Dershowitz, N. Orderings for term rewriting systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 17(3) (1982) 279-301.
8. Dowek, G., Felty, A., Herbelin, H., Huet, G., Murthy, C., Parent, C., Paulin-Mohring, C., and Werner, B. The Coq proof assistant user's guide. Rapport Technique 154, INRIA, Rocquencourt, France. Version 5.8. 1993.
9. Girard, J.-Y. Interprétation Fonctionnelle et Élimination des Coupures dans l'Arithmétique d'Ordre Supérieur. Thèse de doctorat d'état, Université de Paris VII, Paris, France, 1972.
10. Girard, J.-Y., Lafont, Y., and Taylor, P. Proofs and Types, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 7, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1989.
11. Grobauer, B. Cost recurrences for DML programs. In Proceedings of Sixth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP'O1), Florence, Italy, 2001, pp. 253-264.
12. Harper, R. Proof-directed debugging. Journal of Functional Programming, 9(4) (1999) 471-477.
13. Hughes, J., Pareto, L., and Sabry, A. Proving the correctness of reactive systems using sized types. In Conference Record of 23rd ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL '96), 1996, pp. 410-423.
14. Jouannaud, J.-P. and Rubio, A. The higher-order recursive path ordering. In Proceedings of 14th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS '99), Trento, Italy, 1999, pp. 402-411.
15. Lee, C.S., Jones, N.D., and Ben-Amram, A.M. The size-change principle for program termination. In Proceeding of the 28th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL '01), London, UK, 2001, pp. 81-92.
16. Milner, R., Tofte, M., Harper, R.W., and MacQueen, D. The Definition of Standard ML (Revised). MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1997.
17. Necula, G. Proof-carrying code. In Conference Record of 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, ACM Press, Paris, France, 1997, pp. 106-119.
18. Owre, S., Rajan, S., Rushby, J., Shankar, N., and Srivas, M. PVS: Combining specification, proof checking, and model checking. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer-Aided Verification (CAV '96), R. Alur and T.A. Henzinger (Eds.). New Brunswick, NJ, LNCS, Vol. 1102, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 411-414.
19. Paulson, L. Isabelle: A Generic Theorem Prover. LNCS, Vol. 828, Springer-Verlag, 1994.
20. Pientka, B. and Pfenning, F. Termination and reduction checking in the logical framework. In Proceedings of Workshop on Automation of Proofs by Mathematical Induction, Pittsburgh, PA, 2000.
21. Speirs, C., Somogyi, Z., and Søndergaard, H.Termination Analysis for Mercury. In Proceedings of the 4th Static Analysis Symposium (SAS '97), P.V. Hentenryck (Ed.). Paris, France, LNCS, Vol. 1302, Springer-Verlag, 1997, pp. 157-171.
22. Tait, W.W. Intensional interpretations of functionals of finite type I. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 32(2) (1967) 198-212.
23. Ullman, J.D. and Van Gelder, A. Efficient tests for top-down termination of logic rules. Journal of the ACM, 35(2) (1988) 345-373.
24. Xi, H. Dependent types in practical programming. Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1998, pp. viii+189. Available as http://www.cs.cmu.edu/̃hwxi/DML/thesis.ps.
25. Xi, H. Dependent ML, 1999. Available at http://www.cs.bu.edu/̃hwxi/DML/DML.html.
26. Xi, H. Dependently typed data structures. In Proceedings of Workshop on Algorithmic Aspects of Advanced Programming Languages, Paris, France, 1999, pp. 17-33.
27. Xi, H. Dependent types for program termination verification, 2000. Available as http://www.cs.bu.edu/̃hwxi/DML/Term.
28. Xi, H. and Pfenning, F. Eliminating array bound checking through dependent types. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Montréal, Canada, 1998, pp. 249-257.
29. Xi, H. and Pfenning, F. Dependent types in practical programming. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, San Antonio, Texas, 1999, pp. 214-227.
30. Zantema, H. Termination of term rewriting by semantic labelling. Fundamenta Informaticae, 24 (1995) 89-105.