Advertisement

Relationships between logical frameworks

  • Egidio Astesiano
  • Maura Cerioli
Contributed Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 655)

Abstract

Adopting the concept of institution to represent logical frames, we have introduced in a previous paper the concept of simulation of an institution by another. Here we first show how simulations can be used to investigate the relationships between frames, distinguishing three levels, corresponding to different kinds of simulations: “set-theoretic”, where the individual models of different frames are related disregarding their categorical and logical interconnection, “categorical”, where the relation is between the categories of models, and “logical”, where the relation is between specifications. Then we propose a concept of translation of inference systems along simulations such that soundness and completeness are preserved.

Keywords

Inference System Full Subcategory Partial Algebra Logical Simulation Signature Morphism 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E. Astesiano and M. Cerioli. On the existence of initial models for partial (higher-order) conditional specifications. In TAPSOFT'89, number 351 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 74–88, Berlin, 1989. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Astesiano and M. Cerioli. Commuting between institutions via simulation. Technical report, University of Genova, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Astesiano and M. Cerioli. Free objects and equational deduction for partial conditional specifications. Technical report, University of Genova, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Astesiano and M. Cerioli. Partial higher-order specifications. In Math. Found. of Comp. Sci. '91, number 520 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 74–84, Berlin, 1991. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. Astesiano and M. Cerioli. Partial higher-order specifications. Fundamenta Informaticae, 16(2), 1992. To appear.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Broy and M. Wirsing. Partial abstract types. Acta Information, (18):47–64, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Burmeister. Partial algebras — survey of an unifying approach towards a two-valued model theory for partial algebras. Algebra Universalis, 15, 1982.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Burstall and J. Goguen. Introducing institutions. In E. Clarke and D. Kozen, editors, Logics of Programming Workshop, number 164 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 221–255, Berlin, 1984. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Burstall and J. Goguen. Institutions: Abstract model theory for specification and programming. Technical report. Computer Science Lab., SRI International, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    V. Manca and A. Salibra. Equational calculi for many-sorted algebras with empty carriers. In Math. Found. of Comp. Sci. '90, number 452 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Manca, A. Salibra, and G. Scollo. On the expressiveness of equational type logic. In C. Rattray and R. Clark, editors, The Unified Computation Laboratory. Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Meinke. Universal algebra in higher types. Theoretical Computer Science, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Meseguer. General logics. In Logic Colloquium '87. North Holland, 1989.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Meseguer and J. Goguen. Initiality, Induction and Computability, pages 459–540. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Möller. Algebraic specifications with higher-order operations. In IFJP TC 2 Working Conference on Program Specification and Transformation. North Holland, 1987.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Mosses. Unified algebras and modules. Technical Report DAIMI PB-266, CS Dept., Aarhus University, 1988.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Navarro, P. Nivela, F. Orejas, and A. Sanchez. On translating partial to total specifications with applications to theorem proving for partial specifications. Technical Report LSI-89-21, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 1990.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. Padawitz and M. Wirsing. Completeness of many-sorted equational logic revisited. Bulletin EATCS, (24), 1984.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Z. Qian. Higher-order order-sorted algebras. In 2nd International Conference on Algebraic and Logic Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    H. Reichel. Initial Computability, Algebraic Specifications, and Partial Algebras. Oxford University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Salibra and G. Scollo. A soft stairway to institutions. In this volume, August 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. Sannella and A. Tarlecki. Specifications in an arbitrary institution. Information and Computation, (76):165–210, 1988.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Sannella and M. Wirsing. Implementations of parameterized specifications. In 9th Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, number 140 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, 1982. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Tarlecki. Quasi-varieties in abstract algebraic institutions. Journal of Computer and System Science, (33):333–360, 1986.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Tarlecki. Institution representation. draft note, November 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Egidio Astesiano
    • 1
  • Maura Cerioli
    • 1
  1. 1.DISI-Dipartimento di Informatica e Scienze dell'InformazioneUniversità di GenovaGenovaItaly

Personalised recommendations