Using a generalisation critic to find bisimulations for coinductive proofs

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

Volumn 1249, Issue , 1997, Pages 276-290

  Dennis, Louise ^a   Bundy, Alan ^a   Green, Ian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; THEOREM PROVING;

BISIMILARITY; BISIMULATIONS; COINDUCTION; FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGES; GENERALISATION; PROOF TOOLS; PROOF-PLANNING; USER INTERACTION;

HEURISTIC METHODS;

EID: 84957090423     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-63104-6_29     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. S. Abramsky. The lazy lambda calculus. In D. Turner, editor, Research Topics in Functional Programming, pages 65-117. Addison Wesley, 1990.
2. D. Basin and T. Walsh. Difference matching. In Deepak Kapur, editor, 11th Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 295-309, Saratoga Springs, NY, USA, June 1992. Published as Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, No 607.
3. Richard S. Bird and Philip Wadler. Introduction to Functional Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1988.
4. A. Bouhoula and M. Rusinowitch. Automatic case analysis in proof by induction. In Proceedings of the 13th IJCAI. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1993.
5. Alan Bundy. The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. Research Paper 349, Dept, of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 1988. Short version published in the proceedings of CADE-9.
6. Alan Bundy, editor. 12th Conference on Automated Deduction, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 814, Nancy, France, 1994. Springer-Verlag.
7. Alan Bundy, F. van Harmelen, C. Horn, and A. Smaill. The Oyster-Clam system. In M. E. Stickel, editor, 10th International Conference on Automated Deduction, pages 647-648. Springer-Verlag, 1990. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 449. Also available from Edinburgh as DAI Research Paper 507.
8. G. Collins. A proof tool for reasoning about functional programs. In J. von Wright, J. Grundy, and J Harrison, editors, 9th International Conference of Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics, volume 1125 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 109-124. Springer, 1996.
9. L. Dennis, A. Bundy, and I. Green. Using a generalisation critic to find bisimulations for coinductive proof. Research paper 834, Dept, of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, December 1996.
10. M. Fiore. A coinduction principle for recursive data types based on bisimulation. In Proceedings of the Eight IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 110-119,1993.
11. J. Frost. A case study of co-induction in isabelle. Forthcoming technical report, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, 1995.
12. A. D. Gordon. Bisimilarity as a theory of functional programming. In Proceedings of 11th Conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, To appear as Electronic Notes in Computer Science, v.l, New Orleans, 1995. Elsevier.
13. A. D. Gordon. A tutorial on co-induction and functional programming. In Proceedings of the 1994 Glasgow Workshop on Functional Programming, Springer Workshops in Computing, 1995.
14. A. D. Gordon. Bisimilarity for a first-order calculus of objects with subtyping. In Proceedings, 33rd Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 386-395, St. Petersburg Beach, Florida, USA, 21-24 January 1996. ACM SIGPLAN- SIGACT. '
15. Douglas J. Howe. Equality in lazy computation systems. In Proceedings, Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 198-203, Asilomar Conference Center, Pacific Grove, California, 5-8 June 1989. IEEE Computer Society Press.
16. A. Ireland. The Use of Planning Critics in Mechanizing Inductive Proofs. In A. Voronkov, editor, International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning - LPAR 92, St. Petersburg, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 624, pages 178-189. Springer-Verlag, 1992. Also available from Edinburgh as DAI Research Paper 592.
17. A. Ireland and A. Bundy. Productive use of failure in inductive proof. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 16(l-2):79-111, 1996. Also available as DAI Research Paper No 716, Dept, of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh.
18. R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, London, 1989.
19. Robin Milner and Mads Tofte. Co-induction in relational semantics. Theoretical Computer Science, 87:209-220, 1991.
20. Christine Paulin-Mohring. Circuits as streams in Coq verification of a sequential multiplier. Technical Report RR95-16, Laboratoire de Ilnformatique du Parallel- isme, 1995.
21. L. C. Paulson. Co-induction and Co-recursion in Higher-order Logic. Technical Report 304, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, 1993.
22. Lawrence C. Paulson. A fixedpoint approach to implementing (co)inductive definitions. In Bundy [6], pages 148-161.
23. A. M. Pitts. A Co-Induction Principle for Recursively Defined Domains. Technical Report 252, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, April 1992.
24. A. Tarski. A lattice-theoretical fixpoint theorem and its applications. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 5:285-309, 1955.
25. M. Thomas and K. P. Jantke. Inductive inference for solving divergance in Knuth- Bendix. In K. P. Jantke, editor, Analogical and Inductive Inference, Procs. of AII'89, pages 288-303. Springer-Verlag, 1989.
26. T. Walsh. A divergence critic. In Bundy [6], pages 14-28.
27. A. Wikström. Functional Programming Using Standard ML. Prentice-Hall, 1987.