Results 1  10
of
355,897
An Inductive Proof of the Wellfoundedness of the Multiset Order
, 1998
"... The following note presents an inductive proof of the wellfoundedness of the... ..."
Abstract

Cited by 10 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The following note presents an inductive proof of the wellfoundedness of the...
The Use of Explicit Plans to Guide Inductive Proofs
 9TH CONFERENCE ON AUTOMATED DEDUCTION
, 1988
"... We propose the use of explicit proof plans to guide the search for a proof in automatic theorem proving. By representing proof plans as the specifications of LCFlike tactics, [Gordon et al 79], and by recording these specifications in a sorted metalogic, we are able to reason about the conjectures ..."
Abstract

Cited by 296 (40 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose the use of explicit proof plans to guide the search for a proof in automatic theorem proving. By representing proof plans as the specifications of LCFlike tactics, [Gordon et al 79], and by recording these specifications in a sorted metalogic, we are able to reason about
Inductive proofs of computational secrecy
 In ESORICS
, 2007
"... Abstract. Secrecy properties of network protocols assert that no probabilistic polynomialtime distinguisher can win a suitable game presented by a challenger. Because such properties are not determined by tracebytrace behavior of the protocol, we establish a tracebased protocol condition, suitabl ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
, suitable for inductive proofs, that guarantees a generic reduction from protocol attacks to attacks on underlying primitives. We use this condition to present a compositional inductive proof system for secrecy, and illustrate the system by giving a modular, formal proof of computational authentication
Inductive Proof Automation for Coq
"... We introduce inductive proof automation for Coq that supports reasoning about inductively defined data types and recursively defined functions. This includes support for proofs involving case splits and situations where multiple inductive hypotheses appear in step case proofs. The automation uses th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We introduce inductive proof automation for Coq that supports reasoning about inductively defined data types and recursively defined functions. This includes support for proofs involving case splits and situations where multiple inductive hypotheses appear in step case proofs. The automation uses
Induction Proofs with Partial Functions
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1998
"... In this paper we present a method for automated induction proofs about partial functions. We show that most wellknown techniques developed for (explicit) induction theorem proving are unsound when dealing with partial functions. But surprisingly, by slightly restricting the application of these te ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we present a method for automated induction proofs about partial functions. We show that most wellknown techniques developed for (explicit) induction theorem proving are unsound when dealing with partial functions. But surprisingly, by slightly restricting the application
An Automatic Induction Proof for
"... The termination problem is in general undecidable, however, termination can be proved for specific classes of programs. This work describes an automatic method that tests for termination of modulocase functions by conducting a mathematical induction proof. The system takes a modulocase function an ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
The termination problem is in general undecidable, however, termination can be proved for specific classes of programs. This work describes an automatic method that tests for termination of modulocase functions by conducting a mathematical induction proof. The system takes a modulocase function
Productive Use of Failure in Inductive Proof
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 1995
"... Proof by mathematical induction gives rise to various kinds of eureka steps, e.g. missing lemmata, generalization, etc. Most inductive theorem provers rely upon user intervention in supplying the required eureka steps. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 114 (25 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Proof by mathematical induction gives rise to various kinds of eureka steps, e.g. missing lemmata, generalization, etc. Most inductive theorem provers rely upon user intervention in supplying the required eureka steps.
Using Failure to Guide Inductive Proof
 JOURNAL OF AUTOMATED REASONING
, 1992
"... Lemma discovery and generalization are two of the major hurdles in automating inductive proof. This paper addresses aspects of these related problems. We build upon rippling, a heuristic which plays a pivotal role in guiding inductive proof. Rippling provides a highlevel explanation of how to c ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Lemma discovery and generalization are two of the major hurdles in automating inductive proof. This paper addresses aspects of these related problems. We build upon rippling, a heuristic which plays a pivotal role in guiding inductive proof. Rippling provides a highlevel explanation of how
Integrating Implicit Induction Proofs into
, 2011
"... HAL is a multidisciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L’archive ouverte p ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
HAL is a multidisciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et a ̀ la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.
Results 1  10
of
355,897