JProver: Integrating connection-based theorem proving into interactive proof assistants

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2083 LNAI, Issue , 2001, Pages 421-426

  Schmitt, Stephan ^a   Lorigo, Lori ^b   Kreitz, Christoph ^b   Nogin, Aleksey ^b  

^a SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS; COMPUTATION THEORY; SEMANTICS;

CONSTRUCTIVE LOGIC; FIRST ORDER; INTERACTIVE PROOF ASSISTANTS; PROOF DEVELOPMENT; THEOREM PROVERS;

THEOREM PROVING;

EID: 84867772720     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45744-5_34     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. S. Allen, R. Constable, R. Eaton, C. Kreitz & L. Lorigo. The Nuprl open logical environment. In D. McAllester, ed., CADE-17, LNAI 1831, pages 170-176. Springer, 2000.
2. C. Benzmüller et. al. Ωmega: Towards a mathematical assistant. In W. McCune, ed., CADE-14, LNAI 1249, pages 252-256. Springer, 1997.
3. W. Bibel. Automated Theorem Proving. Vieweg, 1987.
4. R.L. Constable et. al. Implementing Mathematics with the Nuprl proof development system. Prentice Hall, 1986.
5. U. Egly & S. Schmitt. On intuitionistic proof transformations, their complexity, and application to constructive program synthesis. Fundamenta Informaticae 39(1-2):59-83, 1999.
6. M. C. Fitting. Intuitionistic logic, model theory and forcing. Studies in logic and the foundations of mathematics. North-Holland, 1969.
7. G. Gentzen. Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39:176-210, 405-431, 1935.
8. J. Hickey & A. Nogin. Fast tactic-based theorem proving. In J. Harrison & M. Aagaard, eds., TPHOLs 2000, LNCS 1869, pages 252-266. Springer, 2000.
9. Jason J. Hickey, Aleksey Nogin, et al. MetaPRL home page. http://metaprl.org/.
10. C. Kreitz & J. Otten. Connection-based theorem proving in classical and non-classical logics. Journal for Universal Computer Science 5(3):88-112, 1999.
11. C. Kreitz & S. Schmitt. A uniform procedure for converting matrix proofs into sequent-style systems. Journal of Information and Computation 162(1-2):226-254, 2000.
12. C. Kreitz & B. Pientka. Matrix-based inductive theorem proving. In R. Dyckhoff, ed., TABLEAUX-2000, LNAI 1847, pages 294-308. Springer, 2000.
13. The MathBus Term Structure. http://www.cs.cornell.edu/simlab/papers/ mathbus/mathTerm.htm
14. J. Otten & C. Kreitz. T-string-unification: unifying prefixes in non-classical proof methods. In U. Moscato, ed., TABLEAUX'96, LNAI 1071, pages 244-260. Springer, 1996.
15. S. Schmitt. Proof reconstruction in classcial and non-classical logics, Dissertationen zur Künstlichen Intelligenz 239. Infix, 2000.
16. S. Schmitt. A tableau-like representation framework for efficient proof reconstruction. In R. Dyckhoff, ed., TABLEAUX-2000, LNAI 1847, pages 398-414. Springer, 2000.
17. K. Slind, M. Gordon, R. Boulton & A. Bundy. An interface between CLAM and HOL. In C. Kirchner & H. Kirchner, eds., CADE-15, LNAI 1421, pages 134-138. Springer, 1998.