Using lattice theory in higher order logic

  • Linas Laibinis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1125)


We describe an implementation of general (abstract) lattice theory in the HOL system and its use in transformational reasoning within concrete instances of lattices, using the window inference of HOL. The implementation is extensible; users can add new instances of lattices and all the existing transformation rules are then available for the added structures. As a particularly promising application we briefly describe how our system can be used as part of a tool for transformational reasoning about programs (program refinement).


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R.J.R. Back. A calculus of refinements for program derivations. Acta Informatica, 25:593–624, 1988.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.J.R. Back and J. von Wright. Duality in specification languages: a latticetheoretical approach. Acta Informatica, 27:583–625, 1990.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.J.R. Back and J. von Wright. Refinement concepts formalised in higher-order logic. Formal Aspects of Computing, 2:247–272, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M.J.C. Gordon. HOL: A proof generating system for higher-order logic. In VLSI Specification, Verification and Synthesis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.J.C. Gordon, R. Milner and C. Wadsworth. Edinburgh LCF: A mechanised logic of computation. In LNCS 78. Springer-Verlag, 1979.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Grundy. Window Inference in the HOL System. In Proc. of the Int. Workshop on the HOL Theorem Proving System and Its Applications, Aug. 1991. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Gunter. Doing algebra in higher order logic. In the HOL system documentation, Cambridge, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Gunter. The Implementation and Use of Abstract Theories in HOL In Proc. of the Third HOL Users Meeting, Aarhus, Denmark, October 1990. Technical Report DAIMI PB — 340, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Långbacka, R. Rukšėnas and J. von Wright. TkWinHOL: A tool for doing window inference in HOL. In LNCS 971, 245–260. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. Regensburger. HOLCF: Higher Order Logic of Computable Functions. In LNCS 971, 293–307. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P.J. Robinson and J. Staples. Formalising the hierarchical structure of practical mathematical reasoning. Logic and Computation, 1:47–61, 1993.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    P.J. Windley. Abstract Theories in HOL. In Proc. of the Int. Workshop on the HOL Theorem Proving System and Its Applications, September 1992. IFIP Transactions A-20, 197–210.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. von Wright. Doing Lattice Theory in Higher Order Logic. In Technical Report 136, Reports on Computer Science and Mathematics, Series A. Åbo Akademi, Turku, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. von Wright. Program refinement by theorem prover. In Proc. 6th Refinement Workshop, London, January 1994. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linas Laibinis
    • 1
  1. 1.Turku Center for Computer ScienceTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations