Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Prototype Proof Translator from HOL to Coq

  • Conference paper
Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (TPHOLs 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1869))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We describe a low-level proof format, which can be used for independent proof checking and as an intermediate language for translating proofs between systems. The checker is presented as a virtual machine and the proof format as the bytecode. We compare HOL and Coq with a view to designing this pivot language, and describe a prototype which converts recorded HOL proofs into this intermediate format, and then translates them into Coq.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [AHJ+OO]_A. Franke A, S.M. Hess, G.Ch. Jung, M. Kohlhase, and V. Sorge. Agent-oriented integration of distributed mathematical services. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 5, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Henk Barendregt. The quest for correctness. Images of SMC research, pages 39–58, 1996. At ftp://ftp.cs.kun.nl/pub/CompMath.Found/quest.ps.Z.

  3. [BBC+97]_Bruno Barras, Samuel Boutin, Cristina Cornes, Jean-Christophe Filliatre, Eduardo Giménez, Hugo Herbelin, Gerard Huet, Cesar Muñoz, Chetan Murthy, Catherine Parent, Christine Paulin-Mohring, Amokrane Saibi, and Benjamin Werner. The Coq Proof Assistant Reference Manual: Version 6.1. Technical Report RT-0203, Inria, May 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Robert S. Boyer and Gilles Dowek. Towards checking proof-checkers. In Workshop on Types for Proofs and Programs (Type’ 93), 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Boulton, K. Slind, A. Bundy, and M. Gordon. An interface between CLAM and HOL. In J. Grundy and M. Newey, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (TPHOLs’98), volume 1479 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 87–104, Canberra, Australia, September/October 1998. Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. O. Caprotti, D.P. Carlisle, and A.M. Cohen. Draft of the Open Math standard. The Open Math Society, 1999. http://www.nag.co.uk/projects/openmath/omsoc/.

  7. A. P. Felty and D. J. Howe. Hybrid interactive theorem proving using Nuprl and HOL. In William McCune, editor, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automated deduction, volume 1249 of LNAI, pages 351–365, Berlin, July 13–17 1997. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. J. C. Gordon and Thomas F. Melham, editors. Introduction to HOL: A theorem proving environment for higher order logic. Cambridge University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fausto Giunchiglia, Paolo Pecchiari, and Carolyn Talcott. Reasoning theories: Towards an architecture for open mechanized reasoning systems. Technical Note CS-TN-94-15, Stanford University, Department of Computer Science, December 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Robert Harper, Furio Honsell, and Gordon Plotkin. A framework for defining logics. In Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Ithaca, NY, pages 194–204. IEEE, June 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Necula and Lee. Efficient representation and validation of proofs. In LICS: IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 93–104, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wai Wong. Validation of HOL proofs by proof checking. Formal Methods in System Design: An International Journal, 14(2):193–212, March 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vincent Zammit. A comparative study of Coq and HOL. In Elsa L. Gunter and Amy Felty, editors, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics, TPHOLs’97, Murray Hill, NJ, USA, volume 1275 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 323–337. Springer-Verlag, August 1997.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Computing Science, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

    Ewen Denney

Authors
  1. Ewen Denney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Intel Corporation, 5200 NE Elam Young Parkway, Hillsboro, OR, 97124, USA

    Mark Aagaard  & John Harrison  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Denney, E. (2000). A Prototype Proof Translator from HOL to Coq. In: Aagaard, M., Harrison, J. (eds) Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics. TPHOLs 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1869. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44659-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44659-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67863-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44659-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation