Reasoning with Higher-Order Abstract Syntax in a Logical Framework

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 80-136

  Mcdowell, Raymond C ^a   Miller, Dale A ^b  

^a KALAMAZOO COLLEGE   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Definitions; higher order abstract syntax; induction; Languages; logical frameworks; Theory; Verification

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041524803     PISSN: 15293785     EISSN: 1557945X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/504077.504080     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Abramsky, S. 1990. The lazy lambda calculus. In Research Topics in Functional Programming, D. Turner, Ed. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., pp. 65-117
2. Avron, A., Honsell, F., Mason, I. A., and Pollack, R. 1992. Using typed lambda calculus to implement formal systems on a machine. J. Automat. Reas. 9, 309-354
3. Basin, D. A. and Constable, R. L. 1993. Metalogical frameworks. In Logical Environments, G. Huet and G. D. Plotkin, Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1-29
4. Cervesato, I. and Pfenning, F. 2001. A linear logic framework. Inf. Comput to appear. An earlier version appeared in Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1996, IEEE Computer Science Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 264-275
5. Chirimar, J. 1995. Proof theoretic approach to specification languages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
6. Church, A. 1940. A formulation of the simple theory of types. J. Symb. Logic 5, 56-68
7. Despeyroux, J., Felty, A., and Hirschowitz, A. 1995. Higher-order abstract syntax in Coq. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, M. Dezani-Ciancaglini and G. Plotkin, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 902. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 124-138
8. Despeyroux, J. and Hirschowitz, A. 1994. Higher-order abstract syntax with induction in Coq. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, F. Pfenning, Ed. Lecture Notes in Artificial 1ntelligence, vol. 822. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 159-173
9. Despeyroux, J., Pfennzng, F., and Schormann, C. 1997. Primitive recursion for higher-order abstract syntax. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, R. Hindley, Ed. Springer-Verlag, New York
10. Eriksson, L.-H. 1991. A finitary version of the calculus of partial inductive definitions. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Extensions to Logic Programming, L.-H. Eriksson, L. Hallnas, and P. Schroeder-Heister, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial 1ntelligence, vol. 596. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 89-134
11. Eriksson, L.-H. 1993. Finitary partial inductive definitions as a general logic. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Extensions to Logic Programming. Lecture Notes in Artificial 1ntelligence, vol. 798. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 94-119
12. Eriksson, L.-H. 1994. Pi: An interactive derivation editor for the calculus of partial inductive definitions. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Automated Deduction, A. Bundy, Ed. Lecture Notes in Artificial 1ntelligence, vol. 814. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 821-825
13. Felty, A. 1993. Implementing tactics and tacticals in a higher-order logic programming language. J. Automat. Reas. 11, 1 (Aug.), 43-81
14. Felty, A. and Miller, D. 1988. Specifying theorem provers in a higher-order logic programming language. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automated Deduction, E. Lusk and R. Overbeck, Eds. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 61-80
15. Gunter, C. A. 1992. Semantics of Programming Languages: Structures and Techniques. Foundations of Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
16. HallnäS, L. 1991. Partial inductive definitions. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 87, 115-142
17. Hannan, J. J. 1990. Investigating a proof-theoretic meta-language for functional programs. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Pennsylvania
18. Hannan, J. and Miller, D. 1992. From operational semantics to abstract machines. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 2, 4, 415-459
19. Harper, R., Honsell, F., and Plotkin, G. 1993. A framework for defining logics. J. ACM 40, 1, 143-184
20. Hodas, J. and Miller, D. 1994. Logic programming in a fragment of intuitionistic linear logic. Inf. Comput. 110, 2, 327-365
21. Howe, D. J. 1996. Proving congruence of bisimulation in functional programming languages. Inf. Comput. 124, 2, 103-112
22. Huet, G. 1975. A unification algorithm for typed X-calculus. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 1, 27-57
23. Magnusson, L. and Nordstrom, B. 1994. The ALF proof editor and its proof engine. In Types for Proofs and Programs, H. Barendregt and T. Nipkow, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 806. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 213-237
24. Matthews, S. 1997. A practical implementation of simple consequence relations using inductive definitions. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Automated Deduction, W. McCune, Ed. Springer-Verlag, New York
25. Matthews, S., Smaill, A., and Basin, D. 1993. Experience with FS0 as a framework theory. In Logical Environments, G. Huet and G. Plotkin, Eds. Cambridge University Press, pp. 61-82
26. Mcdowell, R. 1997. Reasoning in a logic with definitions and induction. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Pennsylvania
27. Mcdowell, R. and Miller, D. 2000. Cut elimination for a logic with definitions and induction. Theor. Comput. Sci. 232, 91-119
28. Mcdowell, R., Miller, D., and Palamidessi, C. 2001. Encoding transition systems in sequent calculus. Theoret. Comput. Sci., to appear. Preliminary version appeared as McDowell et al. 1996
29. Miller, D. 1990. Abstractions in logic programs. In Logic and Computer Science, P. Odifreddi, Ed. Academic Press, Orlando, Fla., pp. 329-359
30. Miller, D. 1991. A logic programming language with lambda-abstraction, function variables, and simple unification. J. Logic Comput. 1, 4, 497-536
31. Miller, D. 1996. Forum: A multiple-conclusion specification language. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 165, 201-232
32. Miller, D. and Nadathur, G. 1987. A logic programming approach to manipulating formulas and programs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, S. Haridi, Ed. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., pp. 379-388
33. Miller, D., NäDathur, G., Pfenning, F., and Scedrov, A. 1991. Uniform proofs as a foundation for logic programming. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 51, 125-157
34. Mitchell, J. C. 1995. Foundations for Programming Languages. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
35. Paulson, L. C. 1986. Natural deduction as higher-order resolution. J. Logic Prog. 3, 237-258
36. Pfenning, F. 1989. Elf: A language for logic definition and verified metaprogramming. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., pp. 313-321
37. Pfenning, F. 1995. Structural cut elimination. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, D. Kozen, Ed. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., pp. 156-166
38. Pfenning, F. and Elliot, C. 1988. Higher-order abstract syntax. In Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. ACM, New York, pp. 199-208
39. Pfenning, F. and Rohwedder, E. 1992. Implementing the meta-theory of deductive systems. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction, D. Kapur, Ed. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 607. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 537-551
40. Rohwedder, E. and Pfenning, F. 1996. Mode and termination analysis for higher-order logic programs. In Proceedings of the European Symposium on Programming. pp. 296-310
41. Schroeder-Heister, P. 1992. Cut-elimination in logics with definitional reflection. In Nonclassi-cal Logics and Information Processing, D. Pearce and H. Wansing, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 619. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 146-171
42. Schroeder-Heister, P. 1993. Rules of definitional reflection. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, M. Vardi, Ed. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., pp. 222-232
43. Schtjbmann, C. and Pfenning, F. 1998. Automated theorem proving in a simple meta logic for LF. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-15), C. Kirchner and H. Kirchner, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1421. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 286-300
44. Scott, D. S. 1969. A type theoretical alternative to CUCH, ISWIM, OWHY. Unpublished manuscript
45. Vaninwegen, M. 1996. The machine-assisted proof of programming language properties. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Pennsylvania
46. Wajs, J. D. 2000. Design and implementation of a theorem prover for operational semantics. M.S. dissertation, Pennsylvania State Univ