Implementing FS0 in Isabelle: Adding structure at the metalevel
Often the theoretical virtue of simplicity in a theory does not fit with the practical necessities of use. An example of this is Feferman's FS0, a theory of inductive definitions which is very simple, but seems to lack all practical facilities. We present an implementation in the Isabelle generic theorem prover. We show that we can use the facilities available there to provide all the complex structuring facilities we need without compromising the simplicity of the original theory. The result is a thoroughly practical implementation. We further argue that it is unlikely that a custom implementation would be as effective.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.D. Basin, A. Bundy, I. Kraan, and S. Matthews. A framework for program development based on schematic proof. In Proc. 7th Int. Workshop on Software Specification and Design. IEEE, 1993.Google Scholar
- 2.D. Basin and S. Matthews. Structuring metatheory on inductive definitions. In J. Slaney, editor, Proc. CADE-13. Springer, Berlin, 1996.Google Scholar
- 3.N. G. de Bruijn. A survey of the project Automath. In J. R. Hindley and J. P. Seldin, editors, To H. B. Curry: Essays in Combinatory Logic, Lambda Calculus and Formalism, pages 579–606. Academic Press, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
- 4.S. Feferman. Finitary inductive systems. In Logic Colloquium '88. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
- 5.S. Matthews. A general binding facility in FS0. Available from http://www.mpi-sb.mpg.de/∼sean/.Google Scholar
- 6.S. Matthews. Worked examples in FS0. Available from http://www.mpi.-sb.-mpg.de/∼sean/FSexamples.html).Google Scholar
- 7.L. C. Paulson. Isabelle: A generic theorem prover. Springer, Berlin, 1994.Google Scholar
- 8.R. Pollack. On extensibility of proof checkers. In P. Dybjer et al., editors, Types for Proofs and Programs, pages 140–161. Springer, Berlin, 1995.Google Scholar
- 9.C. Talcott. A theory of binding structures, and applications to rewriting. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 112:99–143, 1993.Google Scholar