Advertisement

Algebraic proof assistants in HOL

  • Rix Groenboom
  • Chris Hendriks
  • Indra Polak
  • Jan Terlouw
  • Jan Tijmen Udding
Contributed Lectures
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 947)

Abstract

We explore several ways to formalize the algebraic laws of CSP-like languages in HOL. The intent of the paper is to show how HOL can be tailored to acting as a proof assistant. The emphasis is therefore on the consequences of various choices to be made during the formalization for writing tactics. We end up with a proof assistant that allows a user to make steps of the granularity of an algebraic law. It is not the purpose of this paper to show in HOL that the algebraic laws of some CSP-like language are sound; the purpose is to show how HOL can be used to apply the algebraic laws and act as a rewrite system.

Keywords

Algebraic Approach Parallel Composition Proof Assistant High Order Logic Internal Function 
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. [BG93]
    M.A. Bezem and J.F. Groote. A formal verification of the alternating bit protocol in the calculus of constructions. Technical Report 88, Logic Group Preprint Series, Utrecht University, March 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [BG90]
    G. Birtwistle and B. Graham. Verifying SECD in HOL. In Proceedings of the IFIP TC10/WG10.5 Summer School on Formal Methods for VLSI Design, North Holland, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [BM88]
    Robert S. Boyer and J Strother Moore. A Computational Logic Handbook. Academic Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. [C91]
    A.J. Camilleri. A Higher Order Logic Mechanization of the CSP Failure-Divergence Semantics. In Proceedings of the 4th Banff Higher Order Workshop, G. Birtwistle (ed.), Workshops in Computing Series, Springer Verlag, 1991, pp. 123–150.Google Scholar
  5. [GM93]
    M.J.C. Gordon en T.F. Melham. Introduction to HOL. Cambridge University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. [HRS90]
    M. Heisel, W. Reif and W. Stephan, Tactical Theorem Proving in Program Verification, In: Conference on Automated Deduction, Siekmann (ed), LNCS 449, Spinger Verlag, 1990, pp. 117–131.Google Scholar
  7. [H89]
    Warren A. Hunt, Jr, Microprocessor Design Verification. Journal of Automated Reasoning, Vol 5, Nr 4, December 1989, pp. 429–460.Google Scholar
  8. [JU93]
    M.B. Josephs and J.T. Udding, An Overview of DI Algebra. In: Proc. Hawaii International Conf. System Sciences, T.N. Mudge and V. Milutinovic and L. Hunter (eds), Vol. I, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993, pp. 329–338.Google Scholar
  9. [L94]
    P. G. Lucassen. A Denotational Model and Composition Theorems for a Calculus of Delay-Insensitive Specifications. PhD thesis, Dept. of C.S., Univ. of Groningen, The Netherlands, May 1994.Google Scholar
  10. [N92]
    M. Nesi. A Formalization of the Process Algebra CCS in Higher Order Logic. Technical Report 278, University of Cambrigde Computer Laboratory, December 1992.Google Scholar
  11. [S94]
    M.P.A. Sellink. Verifying Process Algebra Proofs in Type Theory, In: Proceedings of Workshop in Semantics of Specification Languages, D.J. Andrews, J.F. Groote and C.A. Middelburg (eds), October 1993, Utrecht, Springer Verlag, 1994, pp. 315–339.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rix Groenboom
    • 1
  • Chris Hendriks
    • 1
  • Indra Polak
    • 1
  • Jan Terlouw
    • 1
  • Jan Tijmen Udding
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceGroningen UniversityAV GroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations