Computational reverse mathematics and foundational analysis

Reverse mathematics studies which subsystems of second order arithmetic are equivalent to key theorems of ordinary, non-set-theoretic mathematics. The main philosophical application of reverse mathematics proposed thus far is foundational analysis, which explores the limits of different foundations for mathematics in a formally precise manner. This paper gives a detailed account of the motivations and methodology of foundational analysis, which have heretofore been largely left implicit in the practice. It then shows how this account can be fruitfully applied in the evaluation of major foundational approaches by a careful examination of two case studies: a partial realization of Hilbert's program due to Simpson [1988], and predicativism in the extended form due to Feferman and Sch\"{u}tte. Shore [2010, 2013] proposes that equivalences in reverse mathematics be proved in the same way as inequivalences, namely by considering only $\omega$-models of the systems in question. Shore refers to this approach as computational reverse mathematics. This paper shows that despite some attractive features, computational reverse mathematics is inappropriate for foundational analysis, for two major reasons. Firstly, the computable entailment relation employed in computational reverse mathematics does not preserve justification for the foundational programs above. Secondly, computable entailment is a $\Pi^1_1$ complete relation, and hence employing it commits one to theoretical resources which outstrip those available within any foundational approach that is proof-theoretically weaker than $\Pi^1_1\text{-}\mathsf{CA}_0$.Comment: Submitted. 41 page

Proving theorems by program transformation

In this paper we present an overview of the unfold/fold proof method, a method for proving theorems about programs, based on program transformation. As a metalanguage for specifying programs and program properties we adopt constraint logic programming (CLP), and we present a set of transformation rules (including the familiar unfolding and folding rules) which preserve the semantics of CLP programs. Then, we show how program transformation strategies can be used, similarly to theorem proving tactics, for guiding the application of the transformation rules and inferring the properties to be proved. We work out three examples: (i) the proof of predicate equivalences, applied to the verification of equality between CCS processes, (ii) the proof of first order formulas via an extension of the quantifier elimination method, and (iii) the proof of temporal properties of infinite state concurrent systems, by using a transformation strategy that performs program specialization

On proving the equivalence of concurrency primitives

Various concurrency primitives have been added to sequential programming languages, in order to turn them concurrent. Prominent examples are concurrent buffers for Haskell, channels in Concurrent ML, joins in JoCaml, and handled futures in Alice ML. Even though one might conjecture that all these primitives provide the same expressiveness, proving this equivalence is an open challenge in the area of program semantics. In this paper, we establish a first instance of this conjecture. We show that concurrent buffers can be encoded in the lambda calculus with futures underlying Alice ML. Our correctness proof results from a systematic method, based on observational semantics with respect to may and must convergence

Process Algebras

Process Algebras are mathematically rigorous languages with well defined semantics that permit describing and verifying properties of concurrent communicating systems. They can be seen as models of processes, regarded as agents that act and interact continuously with other similar agents and with their common environment. The agents may be real-world objects (even people), or they may be artifacts, embodied perhaps in computer hardware or software systems. Many different approaches (operational, denotational, algebraic) are taken for describing the meaning of processes. However, the operational approach is the reference one. By relying on the so called Structural Operational Semantics (SOS), labelled transition systems are built and composed by using the different operators of the many different process algebras. Behavioral equivalences are used to abstract from unwanted details and identify those systems that react similarly to external experiments

Program transformation for development, verification, and synthesis of programs

This paper briefly describes the use of the program transformation methodology for the development of correct and efficient programs. In particular, we will refer to the case of constraint logic programs and, through some examples, we will show how by program transformation, one can improve, synthesize, and verify programs

Program Transformation for Development, Verification, and Synthesis of Software

In this paper we briefly describe the use of the program transformation methodology for the development of correct and efficient programs. We will consider, in particular, the case of the transformation and the development of constraint logic programs

Verification of Imperative Programs by Constraint Logic Program Transformation

We present a method for verifying partial correctness properties of imperative programs that manipulate integers and arrays by using techniques based on the transformation of constraint logic programs (CLP). We use CLP as a metalanguage for representing imperative programs, their executions, and their properties. First, we encode the correctness of an imperative program, say prog, as the negation of a predicate 'incorrect' defined by a CLP program T. By construction, 'incorrect' holds in the least model of T if and only if the execution of prog from an initial configuration eventually halts in an error configuration. Then, we apply to program T a sequence of transformations that preserve its least model semantics. These transformations are based on well-known transformation rules, such as unfolding and folding, guided by suitable transformation strategies, such as specialization and generalization. The objective of the transformations is to derive a new CLP program TransfT where the predicate 'incorrect' is defined either by (i) the fact 'incorrect.' (and in this case prog is not correct), or by (ii) the empty set of clauses (and in this case prog is correct). In the case where we derive a CLP program such that neither (i) nor (ii) holds, we iterate the transformation. Since the problem is undecidable, this process may not terminate. We show through examples that our method can be applied in a rather systematic way, and is amenable to automation by transferring to the field of program verification many techniques developed in the field of program transformation.Comment: In Proceedings Festschrift for Dave Schmidt, arXiv:1309.455