ISABELLE - THE NEXT 700 THEOREM PROVERS

Isabelle is a generic theorem prover, designed for interactive reasoning in a variety of formal theories. At present it provides useful proof procedures for Constructive Type Theory, various first-order logics, Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, and higher-order logic. This survey of Isabelle serves as an introduction to the literature. It explains why generic theorem proving is beneficial. It gives a thorough history of Isabelle, beginning with its origins in the LCF system. It presents an account of how logics are represented, illustrated using classical logic. The approach is compared with the Edinburgh Logical Framework. Several of the Isabelle object-logics are presented

The foundation of a generic theorem prover

Isabelle is an interactive theorem prover that supports a variety of logics. It represents rules as propositions (not as functions) and builds proofs by combining rules. These operations constitute a meta-logic (or `logical framework') in which the object-logics are formalized. Isabelle is now based on higher-order logic -- a precise and well-understood foundation. Examples illustrate use of this meta-logic to formalize logics and proofs. Axioms for first-order logic are shown sound and complete. Backwards proof is formalized by meta-reasoning about object-level entailment. Higher-order logic has several practical advantages over other meta-logics. Many proof techniques are known, such as Huet's higher-order unification procedure

A MACHINE-ASSISTED PROOF OF GÖDEL'S INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS FOR THE THEORY OF HEREDITARILY FINITE SETS

A formalisation of G\"odel's incompleteness theorems using the Isabelle proof assistant is described. This is apparently the first mechanical verification of the second incompleteness theorem. The work closely follows {\'S}wierczkowski (2003), who gave a detailed proof using hereditarily finite set theory. The adoption of this theory is generally beneficial, but it poses certain technical issues that do not arise for Peano arithmetic. The formalisation itself should be useful to logicians, particularly concerning the second incompleteness theorem, where existing proofs are lacking in detail.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Cambridge University Press via https://doi.org/10.1017/S175502031400011

Proving termination of normalization functions for conditional expressions

Boyer and Moore have discussed a recursive function that puts conditional expressions into normal form [1]. It is difficult to prove that this function terminates on all inputs. Three termination proofs are compared: (1) using a measure function, (2) in domain theory using LCF, (3) showing that its recursion relation, defined by the pattern of recursive calls, is well-founded. The last two proofs are essentially the same though conducted in markedly different logical frameworks. An obviously total variant of the normalize function is presented as the `computational meaning' of those two proofs. A related function makes nested recursive calls. The three termination proofs become more complex: termination and correctness must be proved simultaneously. The recursion relation approach seems flexible enough to handle subtle termination proofs where previously domain theory seemed essential

NATURAL DEDUCTION AS HIGHER-ORDER RESOLUTION

An interactive theorem prover, Isabelle, is under development. In LCF, each inference rule is represented by one function for forwards proof and another (a tactic) for backwards proof. In Isabelle, each inference rule is represented by a Horn clause. Resolution gives both forwards and backwards proof, supporting a large class of logics. Isabelle has been used to prove theorems in Martin-L\"of's Constructive Type Theory. Quantifiers pose several difficulties: substitution, bound variables, Skolemization. Isabelle's representation of logical syntax is the typed lambda-calculus, requiring higher- order unification. It may have potential for logic programming. Depth-first subgoaling along inference rules constitutes a higher-order Prolog

A Mechanised Proof of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems Using Nominal Isabelle

An Isabelle/HOL formalisation of G\"odel's two incompleteness theorems is presented. The work follows \'Swierczkowski's detailed proof of the theorems using hereditarily finite (HF) set theory. Avoiding the usual arithmetical encodings of syntax eliminates the necessity to formalise elementary number theory within an embedded logical calculus. The Isabelle formalisation uses two separate treatments of variable binding: the nominal package is shown to scale to a development of this complexity, while de Bruijn indices turn out to be ideal for coding syntax. Critical details of the Isabelle proof are described, in particular gaps and errors found in the literature.Jesse Alama drew my attention to Swierczkowski, the source material for this ´ project. Christian Urban assisted with nominal aspects of some of the proofs, even writing code. Brian Huffman provided the core formalisation of type hf. Dana Scott offered advice and drew my attention to Kirby. Matt Kaufmann and the referees made many insightful comments.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10817-015-9322-

ACKERMANN’S FUNCTION IN ITERATIVE FORM: A PROOF ASSISTANT EXPERIMENT

Ackermann's function can be expressed using an iterative algorithm, which essentially takes the form of a term rewriting system. Although the termination of this algorithm is far from obvious, its equivalence to the traditional recursive formulation--and therefore its totality--has a simple proof in Isabelle/HOL. This is a small example of formalising mathematics using a proof assistant, with a focus on the treatment of difficult recursions.ERC Advanced Grant ALEXANDRIA (Project GA 742178

A modular, efficient formalisation of real algebraic numbers

This paper presents a construction of the real algebraic numbers with executable arithmetic operations in Isabelle/HOL. Instead of verified resultants, arithmetic operations on real algebraic numbers are based on a decision procedure to decide the sign of a bivariate polynomial (with rational coefficients) at a real algebraic point. The modular design allows the safe use of fast external code. This work can be the basis for decision procedures that rely on real algebraic numbers.The CSC Cambridge International Scholarship is generously funding Wenda Li’s Ph.D. course.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the Association for Computing Machinery via http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2854065.285407

An Isabelle/HOL Formalisation of Green’s Theorem

We mechanise a proof of Green’s theorem in Isabelle/HOL. We use a novel proof that avoids the ubiquitous line integral cancellation argument. This eliminates the need to formalise orientations and region boundaries explicitly with respect to the outwards-pointing normal vector. Instead we appeal to a homological argument about equivalences between paths. Contributions include mechanised theories of line integrals and partial derivatives, as well as the first mechanisation of Green’s theorem

Algebraically Closed Fields in Isabelle/HOL

A fundamental theorem states that every field admits an algebraically closed extension. Despite its central importance, this theorem has never before been formalised in a proof assistant. We fill this gap by documenting its formalisation in Isabelle/HOL, describing the difficulties that impeded this development and their solutions.ERC Advanced Grant ALEXANDRIA (Project GA 742178