BIT Numerical Mathematics

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 605–619 | Cite as

Terminating general recursion

  • Bengt Nordström
Part II Computer Science


In Martin-Löf's type theory, general recursion is not available. The only iterating constructs are primitive recursion over natural numbers and other inductive sets. The paper describes a way to allow a general recursion operator in type theory (extended with propositions). A proof rule for the new operator is presented. The addition of the new operator will not destroy the property that all well-typed programs terminate. An advantage of the new program construct is that it is possible to separate the termination proof of the program from the proof of other properties.

D.2.1 D.2.4 D.3.1 F.3.1 F.3.3 

Key Words

recursion well-founded induction programming logic fixed point termination proof 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Peter Aczel. An introduction to inductive definitions. In J. Barwise, editor,Handbook of Mathematical Logic, pages 739-, North-Holland Publishing Company, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. L. Constable and et. al.Implementing Mathematics with the NuPRL Proof Development System. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Per Martin-Löf. Constructive mathematics and computer programming. InLogic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, VI, 1979, pages 153–175, North-Holland, 1982.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Per Martin-Löf.Intuitionistic Type Theory. Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Bengt Nordström and Kent Petersson.The Semantics of Module Specifications in Martin-Löf's Type Theory. PMG Report 36, Chalmers University of Technology, S-412 96 Göteborg, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Bengt Nordström and Kent Petersson. Types and specifications. In R. E. A. Mason, editor,Proceedings of IFIP 83, pages 915–920, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, October 1983.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Bengt Nordström and Jan Smith. Propositions, types and specifications in Martin-Löf's type theory.BIT, 24(3):288–301, October 1984.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Lawrence C. Paulson. Constructing recursion operators in intuitionistic type theory.Journal of Symbolic Computation, (2):325–355, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Lawrence C. Paulson.Natural Deduction Proof as Higher-Order Resolution. Technical report 82, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, Cambridge, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Kent Petersson.A Programming System for Type Theory. PMG report 9, Chalmers University of Technology, S-412 96 Göteborg, 1982, 1984.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    E. Saaman and G. Malcolm.Well-founded Recursion in Type theory. Technical Report, Subfaculteit Wiskunde en Informatica, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Netherlands, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Jan M. Smith. The identification of propositions and types in Martin-Löf's type theory. InFoundations of Computation Theory, Proceedings of the Conference, pages 445–456, 1983.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© BIT Foundations 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bengt Nordström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceChalmers University of Technology and the University of GöteborgGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations