A Formalised First-Order Con uence Proof for the λ-Calculus Using One-Sorted Variable Names (Barendregt Was Right after all ... almost)

  • René Vestergaard
  • James Brotherston
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2051)


We present the titular proof development which has been implemented in Isabelle/HOL. As a first, the proof is conducted exclusively by the primitive induction principles of the standard syntax and the considered reduction relations: the naive way, so to speak. Curiously, the Barendregt Variable Convention takes on a central technical role in the proof. We also show (i) that our presentation coincides with Curry’s and Hindley’s when terms are considered equal up-to α and (ii) that the con uence properties of all considered calculi are equivalent.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barendregt: The Lambda Calculus — Syntax and Semantics. North-Holland, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burstall: Proving properties of programs by struct. ind. Comp.J., 12, 1967.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Curry, Feys: Combinatory Logic. North-Holland, 1958.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Bruijn: Lambda calculus notation with nameless dummies, a tool for auto. formula manipulation, with appl. to the CR Theorem. Indag. Math., 34, 1972.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Despeyroux, Hirschowitz: HOAS with ind. in COQ. LPAR, 1994. LNAI 822.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Despeyroux, Pfenning, Schürmann: Prim. rec. for HOAS. TLCA, 1997. LNCS 1210.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fiore, Plotkin, Turi: Abstract syntax and variable binding. In Longo [16].Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gabbay, Pitts: A new approach to abstract syntax involving binders. In Longo [16].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Girard: From the rules of logic to the logic of rules. To appear in MSCS.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gordon, Melham: Five axioms of alpha-conversion. TPHOL, 1996. PLNCS 1125.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hindley: The CR Prop. and a Result in Comb. Logic. PhD thesis, Newcastle, 1964.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hofmann: Semantical analysis of HOAS. In Longo [16].Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huet: Residual theory in λ-calculus: A formal development. JFP, 4(3), 1994.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jouannaud, Kirchner: Compl. of a set of rules mod. a set of eq. SIAM, 15, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klop: Combinatory Reduction Systems. Mathematical Centre Tracts 127, 1980.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Longo (ed.): LICS-14, 1999. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McKinna, Pollack: Some lambda calculus and TT formalized. To appear in JAR.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nipkow: More CR proofs (in Isabelle/HOL). CADE-13, 1996. LNCS 1104.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rose: Explicit substitution–tutorial & survey. BRICS-LS-96-13, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rutten: A calc. of transition systems (towards univ. coalg.). CWI-CS-R9503, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    David E. Schroer. The Church-Rosser theorem. PhD thesis, Cornell, June 1965.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schürmann: Automating the Meta Theory of Ded. Syst. PhD thesis, CMU, 2000.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shankar: A mechanical proof of the Church-Rosser Theorem. J. ACM, 35(3), 1988.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takahashi: Parallel reductions in λ-calculus. I. and C., 118, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • René Vestergaard
    • 1
  • James Brotherston
    • 2
  1. 1.CNRS-IMLMarseilleFrance
  2. 2.University of EdinburghScotlandUK

Personalised recommendations