Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T16:43:32.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A fully adequate shallow embedding of the π-calculus in Isabelle/HOL with mechanized syntax analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2003

CHRISTINE RÖCKL
Affiliation:
LAMP–DI–EPFL, INR Ecublens, CH–1015 Lausanne, Switzerland (e-mail: christine.roeckl@epfl.ch)
DANIEL HIRSCHKOFF
Affiliation:
LIP – ENS Lyon, 46, allée d'Italie, F–69364 Lyon Cedex 7, France (e-mail: Daniel.Hirschkoff@ens-lyon.fr)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper discusses an application of the higher-order abstract syntax technique to general-purpose theorem proving, yielding shallow embeddings of the binders of formalized languages. Higher-order abstract syntax has been applied with success in specialized logical frameworks which satisfy a closed-world assumption. As more general environments (like Isabelle/HOL or Coq) do not support this closed-world assumption, higher-order abstract syntax may yield exotic terms, that is, datatypes may produce more terms than there should actually be in the language. The work at hand demonstrates how such exotic terms can be eliminated by means of a two-level well-formedness predicate, further preparing the ground for an implementation of structural induction in terms of rule induction, and hence providing fully-fledged syntax analysis. In order to apply and justify well-formedness predicates, the paper develops a proof technique based on a combination of instantiations and reabstractions of higher-order terms. As an application, syntactic principles like the theory of contexts (as introduced by Honsell, Miculan, and Scagnetto) are derived, and adequacy of the predicates is shown, both within a formalization of the π-calculus in Isabelle/HOL.

Type
Special Issue on Logical frameworks and metalanguages
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press
Submit a response

Discussions

No Discussions have been published for this article.