Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 40, Issue 4, pp 293–306 | Cite as

Rewriting with Equivalence Relations in ACL2

Article

Abstract

Traditionally, a conditional rewrite rule directs replacement of one term by another term that is provably equal to it, perhaps under some hypotheses. This paper generalizes the notion of rewrite rule to permit the connecting relation to be merely an equivalence relation. We then extend the algorithm for applying rewrite rules. Applications of these generalized rewrite rules are only admissible in certain equivalential contexts, so the algorithm tracks which equivalence relations are to be preserved and admissible generalized rewrite rules are selected according to this context. We introduce the notions of congruence rule and refinement rule. We also introduce the idea of generated equivalences, corresponding to a new equivalence relation generated by a set of pre-existing ones. Generated equivalences are used to give the rewriter broad access to admissible generalized rewrite rules. We discuss the implementation of these notions in the ACL2 theorem prover. However, the discussion does not assume familiarity with ACL2, and these ideas can be applied to other reasoning systems as well.

Keywords

Rewriting Congruence Equivalence relations Refinement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Boyer, R., Goldschlag, D., Kaufmann, M., Moore, J.S.: Functional instantiation in first-order logic. In: Lifschitz, V. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of John McCarthy, pp. 7–26. Academic Press (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boyer, R.S., Moore, J.S.: A Computational Logic Handbook, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brock, B.: An Experimental Implementation of Equivalence Reasoning in the Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover. Internal Note #104, Computational Logic, Inc. (1989)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greve, D.: Parameterized congruences in ACL2. In: ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 205. The ACM Digital Libary (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grundy, J.: Window inference in the HOL system. In: Archer, M., Joyce, J.J., Levitt, K.N., Windley, P.J. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on the HOL Theorem Proving System and its Applications, pp. 177–189. IEEE Computer Society Press, University of California at Davis (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harrison, J.: Theorem Proving with the Real Numbers. Springer-Verlag (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaufmann, M., Manolios, P., Moore, J.S.: Computer-Aided Reasoning: An Approach. Kluwer Academic Press, Boston, MA (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaufmann, M., Moore, J.S.: Structured theory development for a mechanized logic. J. Autom. Reason. 26(2), 161–203 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaufmann, M., Moore, J.S.: Double rewriting for equivalential reasoning in ACL2. In: ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 205. The ACM Digital Libary (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaufmann, M., Moore, J.S.: The ACL2 home page. http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/moore/acl2/ (2007)
  11. 11.
    Manna, Z., Waldinger, R.: Special relations in automated deduction. J. ACM 33(1), 1–59 (1986)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nipkow, T., Paulson, L.C., Wenzel, M.: Isabelle/HOL: A Proof Assistant for Higher-order Logic. Springer-Verlag, London, UK (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencesThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations