Proof by consistency in constructive systems with final algebra semantics

  • Olav Lysne
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 632)


In this paper we study final algebra semantics for constructive equational systems, A class of models of a constructive system is described, and proven to have a final algebra. Then we develop a method for proof by consistency with respect to the final model. Finally we show that the method contains the proof methods of Musser [11], Goguen [2], and Huet and Hullot


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    O.-J. Dahl, Dag F. Langmyhr, and O. Owe. Preliminary report on the specification and programming language ABEL. Technical Report 106, Informatics Department, University of Oslo, Norway, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.A. Goguen. How to prove inductive hypotheses without induction. In W. Bibel and R. Kowalski, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 87 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 356–373. Springer-Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.V. Guttag. The Specification and Application to Programming of Abstract Data Types. PhD thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Toronto, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.V. Guttag, J.J. Horning, and J.M. Wing. Larch in five easy pieces. Technical report, Digital Systems Research Center, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Huet and J.-M. Hullot. Proofs by induction in equational theories with constructors. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, pages 239–266, 1982.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.-P. Jouannaud and E. Kounalis. Automatic proofs in theories without constructors. Technical Report 295, Universite de Paris-Sud, Centre d'Orsay, septembre 1986.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Kamin. Final data types and their specification. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 5(1):97–123, January 1983.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Kapur and R. Musser. Proof by consistency. Artificial Intelligence, 31:125–157, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Lescanne. Behavioural categoricity of abstract data type specifications. The Computer Journal, 26(4):289–292, 1983.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    O. Lysne. Term Rewriting Techniques for Systems based on Generator Induction. PhD thesis, Informatics Department, University of Oslo, Norway, 1991. Technical report 163.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D.L. Musser. On proving inductive properties in abstract data types. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 154–162, January 1980.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. Owe. A specification Technique with Idealization. PhD thesis, Informatics Department, University of Oslo, Norway, March 1980.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Plaisted. Semantic confluence tests and completion methods. Information and Control, 65:182–215, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Puel. Proof in the final algebra. In B. Courcelle, editor, Proceedings 9th Colloquium on Trees in Algebra and Programming, pages 227–242. Cambridge University Press, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olav Lysne
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloNorway

Personalised recommendations