1,158 research outputs found
Building Decision Procedures in the Calculus of Inductive Constructions
It is commonly agreed that the success of future proof assistants will rely
on their ability to incorporate computations within deduction in order to mimic
the mathematician when replacing the proof of a proposition P by the proof of
an equivalent proposition P' obtained from P thanks to possibly complex
calculations. In this paper, we investigate a new version of the calculus of
inductive constructions which incorporates arbitrary decision procedures into
deduction via the conversion rule of the calculus. The novelty of the problem
in the context of the calculus of inductive constructions lies in the fact that
the computation mechanism varies along proof-checking: goals are sent to the
decision procedure together with the set of user hypotheses available from the
current context. Our main result shows that this extension of the calculus of
constructions does not compromise its main properties: confluence, subject
reduction, strong normalization and consistency are all preserved
A Universal Machine for Biform Theory Graphs
Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of semantics-aware assistant systems
for mathematics: proof assistants express the semantic in logic and emphasize
deduction, and computer algebra systems express the semantics in programming
languages and emphasize computation. Combining the complementary strengths of
both approaches while mending their complementary weaknesses has been an
important goal of the mechanized mathematics community for some time. We pick
up on the idea of biform theories and interpret it in the MMTt/OMDoc framework
which introduced the foundations-as-theories approach, and can thus represent
both logics and programming languages as theories. This yields a formal,
modular framework of biform theory graphs which mixes specifications and
implementations sharing the module system and typing information. We present
automated knowledge management work flows that interface to existing
specification/programming tools and enable an OpenMath Machine, that
operationalizes biform theories, evaluating expressions by exhaustively
applying the implementations of the respective operators. We evaluate the new
biform framework by adding implementations to the OpenMath standard content
dictionaries.Comment: Conferences on Intelligent Computer Mathematics, CICM 2013 The final
publication is available at http://link.springer.com
Nominal Abstraction
Recursive relational specifications are commonly used to describe the
computational structure of formal systems. Recent research in proof theory has
identified two features that facilitate direct, logic-based reasoning about
such descriptions: the interpretation of atomic judgments through recursive
definitions and an encoding of binding constructs via generic judgments.
However, logics encompassing these two features do not currently allow for the
definition of relations that embody dynamic aspects related to binding, a
capability needed in many reasoning tasks. We propose a new relation between
terms called nominal abstraction as a means for overcoming this deficiency. We
incorporate nominal abstraction into a rich logic also including definitions,
generic quantification, induction, and co-induction that we then prove to be
consistent. We present examples to show that this logic can provide elegant
treatments of binding contexts that appear in many proofs, such as those
establishing properties of typing calculi and of arbitrarily cascading
substitutions that play a role in reducibility arguments.Comment: To appear in the Journal of Information and Computatio
YAPA: A generic tool for computing intruder knowledge
Reasoning about the knowledge of an attacker is a necessary step in many
formal analyses of security protocols. In the framework of the applied pi
calculus, as in similar languages based on equational logics, knowledge is
typically expressed by two relations: deducibility and static equivalence.
Several decision procedures have been proposed for these relations under a
variety of equational theories. However, each theory has its particular
algorithm, and none has been implemented so far. We provide a generic procedure
for deducibility and static equivalence that takes as input any convergent
rewrite system. We show that our algorithm covers most of the existing decision
procedures for convergent theories. We also provide an efficient
implementation, and compare it briefly with the tools ProVerif and KiSs
Designing Normative Theories for Ethical and Legal Reasoning: LogiKEy Framework, Methodology, and Tool Support
A framework and methodology---termed LogiKEy---for the design and engineering
of ethical reasoners, normative theories and deontic logics is presented. The
overall motivation is the development of suitable means for the control and
governance of intelligent autonomous systems. LogiKEy's unifying formal
framework is based on semantical embeddings of deontic logics, logic
combinations and ethico-legal domain theories in expressive classic
higher-order logic (HOL). This meta-logical approach enables the provision of
powerful tool support in LogiKEy: off-the-shelf theorem provers and model
finders for HOL are assisting the LogiKEy designer of ethical intelligent
agents to flexibly experiment with underlying logics and their combinations,
with ethico-legal domain theories, and with concrete examples---all at the same
time. Continuous improvements of these off-the-shelf provers, without further
ado, leverage the reasoning performance in LogiKEy. Case studies, in which the
LogiKEy framework and methodology has been applied and tested, give evidence
that HOL's undecidability often does not hinder efficient experimentation.Comment: 50 pages; 10 figure
Extensional and Intensional Strategies
This paper is a contribution to the theoretical foundations of strategies. We
first present a general definition of abstract strategies which is extensional
in the sense that a strategy is defined explicitly as a set of derivations of
an abstract reduction system. We then move to a more intensional definition
supporting the abstract view but more operational in the sense that it
describes a means for determining such a set. We characterize the class of
extensional strategies that can be defined intensionally. We also give some
hints towards a logical characterization of intensional strategies and propose
a few challenging perspectives
Matching Logic
This paper presents matching logic, a first-order logic (FOL) variant for
specifying and reasoning about structure by means of patterns and pattern
matching. Its sentences, the patterns, are constructed using variables,
symbols, connectives and quantifiers, but no difference is made between
function and predicate symbols. In models, a pattern evaluates into a power-set
domain (the set of values that match it), in contrast to FOL where functions
and predicates map into a regular domain. Matching logic uniformly generalizes
several logical frameworks important for program analysis, such as:
propositional logic, algebraic specification, FOL with equality, modal logic,
and separation logic. Patterns can specify separation requirements at any level
in any program configuration, not only in the heaps or stores, without any
special logical constructs for that: the very nature of pattern matching is
that if two structures are matched as part of a pattern, then they can only be
spatially separated. Like FOL, matching logic can also be translated into pure
predicate logic with equality, at the same time admitting its own sound and
complete proof system. A practical aspect of matching logic is that FOL
reasoning with equality remains sound, so off-the-shelf provers and SMT solvers
can be used for matching logic reasoning. Matching logic is particularly
well-suited for reasoning about programs in programming languages that have an
operational semantics, but it is not limited to this
- …