Refinement of Higher-Order Logic Programs

  • Robert Colvin
  • Ian Hayes
  • David Hemer
  • Paul Strooper
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2664)


A refinement calculus provides a method for transforming specifications to executable code, maintaining the correctness of the code with respect to its specification. In this paper we extend the refinement calculus for logic programs to include higher-order programming capabilities in specifications and programs, such as procedures as terms and lambda abstraction. We use a higher-order type and term system to describe programs, and provide a semantics for the higher-order language and refinement. The calculus is illustrated by refinement examples.


Logic Program Procedure Call Recursive Procedure Proof Obligation Type Constructor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B.A. Davey and H.A. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oege de Moor and Ganesh Sittampalam. Higher-order matching for program transformation. Theoretical Computer Science, 269(1–2):135–162, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Deville and K.-K. Lau. Logic program synthesis. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:321–350, 1994. Special Issue: Ten Years of Logic Programming.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Hayes, R. Nickson, P. Strooper, and R. Colvin. A declarative semantics for logic program refinement. Technical Report 00-30, Software Verification Research Centre, The University of Queensland, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    I. J. Hayes, R. Colvin, D. Hemer, R. Nickson, and P. A. Strooper. A refinement calculus for logic programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 2(4–5):425–460, July–September 2002.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    David Lacey, Julian Richardson, and Alan Smaill. Logic program synthesis in a higher-order setting. In John W. Lloyd et al., editor, Computational Logic 2000, volume 1861 of LNAI, pages 87–100. Springer-Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zohar Manna. Mathematical Theory of Computation. McGraw-Hill, 1974.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carroll Morgan. Programming from Specifications. Prentice Hall, second edition, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Nadathur and D. Miller. An overview of Lambda-PROLOG. In Kenneth A. Bowen and Robert A. Kowalski, editors, Fifth International Logic Programming Conference, pages 810–827. MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Nadathur and D. Miller. Higher-order logic programming. In Dov M. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger, and J. A. Robinson, editors, Handbook of Logics for Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, volume 5, chapter 8, pages 499–590. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. A. Naumann. Predicate transformer semantics of a higher order imperative language with record subtyping. Science of Computer Programming, 41(1):1–51, September 2001.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. A. Partsch. Specification and Transformation of Programs. Springer-Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Sannella. Formal program development in Extended ML for the working programmer. In Proc. 3rd BCS/FACS Workshop on Refinement, Springer Workshops in Computing, pages 99–130. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Seres and M. Spivey. Higher-order transformation of logic programs. In K.-K. Lau, editor, Proceedings of the Tenth International Workshop on Logic-based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2000), volume 2042 of LNCS, pages 57–68. Springer-Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Z. Somogyi, F.J. Henderson, and T.C. Conway. Mercury, an efficient purely declarative logic programming language. In R. Kotagiri, editor, Proceedings of the Eighteenth Australasian Computer Science Conference, pages 499–512, Glenelg, South Australia, 1995. Australian Computer Science Communications.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. M. Spivey. The Z Notation: A Reference Manual. Prentice Hall, second edition, 1992.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nigel Ward. A Refinement Calculus for Nondeterministic Expressions. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Queensland, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Colvin
    • 1
  • Ian Hayes
    • 2
  • David Hemer
    • 1
  • Paul Strooper
    • 2
  1. 1.Software Verification Research CentreBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Information Technology and Electrical EngineeringUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations