Compensation methods to support cooperative applications: A case study in automated verification of schema requirements for an advanced transaction model

Compensation plays an important role in advanced transaction models, cooperative work and workflow systems. A schema designer is typically required to supply for each transaction another transaction to semantically undo the effects of . Little attention has been paid to the verification of the desirable properties of such operations, however. This paper demonstrates the use of a higher-order logic theorem prover for verifying that compensating transactions return a database to its original state. It is shown how an OODB schema is translated to the language of the theorem prover so that proofs can be performed on the compensating transactions

A Sequent Calculus for Modelling Interferences

A logic calculus is presented that is a conservative extension of linear logic. The motivation beneath this work concerns lazy evaluation, true concurrency and interferences in proof search. The calculus includes two new connectives to deal with multisequent structures and has the cut-elimination property. Extensions are proposed that give first results concerning our objectives

A System of Interaction and Structure

This paper introduces a logical system, called BV, which extends multiplicative linear logic by a non-commutative self-dual logical operator. This extension is particularly challenging for the sequent calculus, and so far it is not achieved therein. It becomes very natural in a new formalism, called the calculus of structures, which is the main contribution of this work. Structures are formulae submitted to certain equational laws typical of sequents. The calculus of structures is obtained by generalising the sequent calculus in such a way that a new top-down symmetry of derivations is observed, and it employs inference rules that rewrite inside structures at any depth. These properties, in addition to allow the design of BV, yield a modular proof of cut elimination.Comment: This is the authoritative version of the article, with readable pictures, in colour, also available at . (The published version contains errors introduced by the editorial processing.) Web site for Deep Inference and the Calculus of Structures at <http://alessio.guglielmi.name/res/cos

How functional programming mattered

In 1989 when functional programming was still considered a niche topic, Hughes wrote a visionary paper arguing convincingly ‘why functional programming matters’. More than two decades have passed. Has functional programming really mattered? Our answer is a resounding ‘Yes!’. Functional programming is now at the forefront of a new generation of programming technologies, and enjoying increasing popularity and influence. In this paper, we review the impact of functional programming, focusing on how it has changed the way we may construct programs, the way we may verify programs, and fundamentally the way we may think about programs

LFTOP: An LF based approach to domain specific reasoning

Specialized vocabulary, notations and inference rules tailored for the description, analysis and reasoning of a domain is very important for the domain. For domain-specific issues researchers focus mainly on the design and implementation of domain-specific languages (DSL) and pay little attention to the reasoning aspects. We believe that domain-specific reasoning is very important to help the proofs of some properties of the domains and should be more concise, more reusable and more believable. It deserves to be investigated in an engineering way. Type theory provides good support for generic reasoning and verification. Many type theorists want to extend uses of type theory to more domains, and believe that the methods, ideas, and technology of type theory can have a beneficial effect for computer assisted reasoning in many domains. Proof assistants based on type theory are well known as effective tools to support reasoning. But these proof assistants have focused primarily on generic notations for representation of problems and are oriented towards helping expert type theorists build proofs efficiently. They are successful in this goal, but they are less suitable for use by non-specialists. In other words, one of the big barriers to limit the use of type theory and proof assistant in domain-specific areas is that it requires significant expertise to use it effectively. We present LFTOP ― a new approach to domain-specific reasoning that is based on a type-theoretic logical framework (LP) but does not require the user to be an expert in type theory. In this approach, users work on a domain-specific interface that is familiar to them. The interface presents a reasoning system of the domain through a user-oriented syntax. A middle layer provides translation between the user syntax and LF， and allows additional support for reasoning (e.g. model checking). Thus, the complexity of the logical framework is hidden but we also retain the benefits of using type theory and its related tools, such as precision and machine-checkable proofs. The approach is being investigated through a number of case studies. In each case study, the relevant domain-specific specification languages and logic are formalized in Plastic. The relevant reasoning system is designed and customized for the users of the corresponding specific domain. The corresponding lemmas are proved in Plastic. We analyze the advantages and shortcomings of this approach, define some new concepts related to the approach, especially discuss issues arising from the translation between the different levels. A prototype implementation is developed. We illustrate the approach through many concrete examples in the prototype implementation. The study of this thesis shows that the approach is feasible and promising, the relevant methods and technologies are useful and effective