A Comparative Study of Coq and HOL

This paper illustrates the differences between the style of theory mechanisation of Coq and of HOL. This comparative study is based on the mechanisation of fragments of the theory of computation in these systems. Examples from these implementations are given to support some of the arguments discussed in this paper. The mechanisms for specifying definitions and for theorem proving are discussed separately, building in parallel two pictures of the different approaches of mechanisation given by these systems

Research in mathematical theory of computation

Research progress in the following areas is reviewed: (1) new version of computer program LCF (logic for computable functions) including a facility to search for proofs automatically; (2) the description of the language PASCAL in terms of both LCF and in first order logic; (3) discussion of LISP semantics in LCF and attempt to prove the correctness of the London compilers in a formal way; (4) design of both special purpose and domain independent proving procedures specifically program correctness in mind; (5) design of languages for describing such proof procedures; and (6) the embedding of ideas in the first order checker

Recursive Program Optimization Through Inductive Synthesis Proof Transformation

The research described in this paper involved developing transformation techniques which increase the efficiency of the noriginal program, the source, by transforming its synthesis proof into one, the target, which yields a computationally more efficient algorithm. We describe a working proof transformation system which, by exploiting the duality between mathematical induction and recursion, employs the novel strategy of optimizing recursive programs by transforming inductive proofs. We compare and contrast this approach with the more traditional approaches to program transformation, and highlight the benefits of proof transformation with regards to search, correctness, automatability and generality

Constrained Query Answering

Traditional answering methods evaluate queries only against positive and definite knowledge expressed by means of facts and deduction rules. They do not make use of negative, disjunctive or existential information. Negative or indefinite knowledge is however often available in knowledge base systems, either as design requirements, or as observed properties. Such knowledge can serve to rule out unproductive subexpressions during query answering. In this article, we propose an approach for constraining any conventional query answering procedure with general, possibly negative or indefinite formulas, so as to discard impossible cases and to avoid redundant evaluations. This approach does not impose additional conditions on the positive and definite knowledge, nor does it assume any particular semantics for negation. It adopts that of the conventional query answering procedure it constrains. This is achieved by relying on meta-interpretation for specifying the constraining process. The soundness, completeness, and termination of the underlying query answering procedure are not compromised. Constrained query answering can be applied for answering queries more efficiently as well as for generating more informative, intensional answers

A Step-indexed Semantics of Imperative Objects

Step-indexed semantic interpretations of types were proposed as an alternative to purely syntactic proofs of type safety using subject reduction. The types are interpreted as sets of values indexed by the number of computation steps for which these values are guaranteed to behave like proper elements of the type. Building on work by Ahmed, Appel and others, we introduce a step-indexed semantics for the imperative object calculus of Abadi and Cardelli. Providing a semantic account of this calculus using more `traditional', domain-theoretic approaches has proved challenging due to the combination of dynamically allocated objects, higher-order store, and an expressive type system. Here we show that, using step-indexing, one can interpret a rich type discipline with object types, subtyping, recursive and bounded quantified types in the presence of state

Logic Programming as Constructivism

The features of logic programming that seem unconventional from the viewpoint of classical logic can be explained in terms of constructivistic logic. We motivate and propose a constructivistic proof theory of non-Horn logic programming. Then, we apply this formalization for establishing results of practical interest. First, we show that 'stratification can be motivated in a simple and intuitive way. Relying on similar motivations, we introduce the larger classes of 'loosely stratified' and 'constructively consistent' programs. Second, we give a formal basis for introducing quantifiers into queries and logic programs by defining 'constructively domain independent* formulas. Third, we extend the Generalized Magic Sets procedure to loosely stratified and constructively consistent programs, by relying on a 'conditional fixpoini procedure