Focusing on binding and computation

Proceedings - Symposium on Logic in Computer Science

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 241-252

  Licata, Daniel R ^a   Zeilberger, Noam ^a   Harper, Robert ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFERENCE RULES; LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE; SEQUENT CALCULUS;

COMPUTER NETWORKS; COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS; DIFFERENTIATION (CALCULUS); LINGUISTICS; PROGRAM INTERPRETERS; RECURSIVE FUNCTIONS;

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES;

EID: 51549090838     PISSN: 10436871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/LICS.2008.48     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. T. Altenkirch and B. Reus. Monadic presentations of lambda terms using generalized inductive types. In CSL 1999: Computer Science Logic. LNCS, Springer-Verlag, 1999.
2. S. Ambler, R. L. Crole, and A. Momigliano. Combining higher order abstract syntax with tactical theorem proving and (co)induction. In International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher-Order Logics, pages 13-30, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.
3. J.-M. Andreoli. Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2(3):297-347, 1992.
4. A. Avron. Simple consequence relations. Information and Computation, 92(1):105-139, 1991.
5. B. Aydemir, A. Charguéraud, B. C. Pierce, R. Pollack, and S. Weirich. Engineering formal metatheory. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 3-15, 2008.
6. F. Bellegarde and J. Hook. Substitution: A formal methods case study using monads and transformations. Science of Computer Programming, 23(2-3):287-311, 1994.
7. R. S. Bird and R. Paterson. De Bruijn notation as a nested datatype. Journal of Functional Programming, 9(1):77-91. 1999.
8. A. Bucalo, M. Hofmann, F. Honsell, M. Miculan, and I. Scagnetto. Consistency of the theory of contexts. Journal of Functional Programming, 16(3):327-395, May 2006.
9. V. Capretta and A. Felty. Combining de Bruijn indices and higher-order abstract syntax in Coq. In Proceedings of TYPES 2006, volume 4502 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 63-77. Springer-Verlag, 2007.
10. Coq Development Team. The Coq Proof Assistant Reference Manual. INRIA, 2007. Available from http://coq.inria.fr/.
11. J. Despeyroux, A. Felty, and A. Hirschowitz. Higherorder abstract syntax in Coq. In M. Dezani-Ciancaglini and G. Plotkin, editors, International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, volume 902 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 124-138, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1995. Springer-Verlag.
12. M. Fiore, G. Plotkin, and D. Turi. Abstract syntax and variable binding. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1999.
13. M. J. Gabbay and A. M. Pitts. A new approach to abstract syntax involving binders. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 214-224. IEEE Press, 1999.
14. J.-Y. Girard. Locus solum: From the rules of logic to the logic of rules. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science. 11(3):301-506,2001.
15. J.-Y. Girard. On the unity of logic. Annals of pure and applied logic, 59(3):201-217, 1993.
16. L. Hallnäs. Partial inductive definitions. Theoretical Computer Science, 87(1):115-142, 16 Sept. 1991.
17. R. Harper, F. Honsell, and G. Plotkin. A framework for defining logics. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery,40(1), 1993.
18. J. Hickey, A. Nogin, X. Yu, and A. Kopylov. Mechanized meta-reasoning using a hybrid HOAS/de Bruijn representation and reflection. In ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, pages 172-183, New York, NY USA, 2006. ACM.
19. M. Hofmann. Semantical analysis of higher-order abstract syntax. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1999.
20. D. J. Howe. On computational open-endedness in Martin-Löf's type theory. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 162-172. IEEE Computer Society, 1991.
21. D. R. Licata and R. Harper. Dependently typed programming with domain-specific logics. Draft available from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/̃drl, April 2008.
22. D. R. Licata, N. Zeilberger, and R. Harper. Focusing on binding and computation. Technical Report CMU-CS-08-101, Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science. Pittsburgh, PA, April 2008.
23. P. Martin-Löf. Hauptsatz for the intuitionistic theory of iterated inductive definitions. In J. E. Fenstad, editor, Proceedings of the Second Scandinavian Logic Symposium, pages 179-216, Amsterdam, 1971. North Holland.
24. D. Miller. An extension to ML to handle bound variables in data structures: Preliminary report. Technical report, Pennsylvania State University, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Aug. 1990.
25. D. Miller and A. F. Tiu. A proof theory for generic judgments: An extended abstract. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 118-127, 2003.
26. A. Momigliano, A. Martin, and A. Felty. Two-level hybrid: A system for reasoning using higher-order abstract syntax. In International Workshop on Logical Frameworks and Meta-Languages: Theory and Practice, 2007.
27. A. Nanevski, F. Pfenning, and B. Pientka. Contextual modal type theory. Transactions on Computational Logic, 2007. To appear.
28. U. Norell. Towards a practical programming language based on dependent type theory. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology,'2007.
29. F. Pfenning and C. Schumann. System description: Twelf - a meta-logical framework for deductive systems. In H. Ganzinger, editor, International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 202-206, 1999.
30. B. Pientka. A type-theoretic foundation for programming with higher-order abstract syntax and first-class substitutions. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 371-382, 2008.
31. A. M. Pitts. Nominal logic, a first order theory of names and binding. Information and Computation, 186:165-193, 2003.
32. A. M. Pitts and M. J. Gabbay. A metalanguage for programming with bound names modulo renaming. In R. Backhouse and J. N. Oliveira, editors, Mathematics of Program Construction, volume 1837 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 230-255. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2000.
33. A. Poswolsky and C. Schürmann. Practical programming with higher-order encodings and dependent types. In European Symposium on Programming, 2008.
34. F. Pottier. Static name control for FreshML. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 2007.
35. P. Schroeder-Heister. Rules of definitional reflection. In R. L. Constable, editor. IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 222-232, Montreal, Canada, June 1993. IEEE Computer Society Press.
36. C. Schürmann, J. Despeyroux, and F. Pfenning. Primitive recursion for higher-order abstract syntax. Theoretical Computer Science, 266:1-57, 2001.
37. M. R. Shinwell, A. M. Pitts, and M. J. Gabbay. FreshML: Programming with binders made simple. In ACM SIG-PLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, pages 263-274, August 2003.
38. C. Urban. Nominal techniques in Isabelle/HOL. Journal of Automatic Reasoning, 2008. To appear.
39. R. Virga. Higher-Order Rewriting with Dependent Types. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1999.
40. K. Watkins, I. Cervesato, F. Pfenning, and D. Walker. A concurrent logical framework I: Judgments and properties. Technical Report CMU-CS-02-101, Department of Computer Science. Carnegie Mellon University. 2002. Revised May 2003.
41. N. Zeilberger. On the unity of duality. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 153(1-3), 2008. Special issue on "Classical Logic and Computation".
42. N. Zeilberger. Focusing and higher-order abstract syntax. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 359-369, 2008.