this paper, we do this by adding the #-quantifier: its role will be to declare variables to be new and of local scope. The syntax of the formula # x.B is like that for the universal and existential quantifiers. Following Church's Simple Theory of Types [Church 1940], formulas are given the type o, and for all types # not containing o, # is a constant of type (# o) o. The expression # #x.B is ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, Vol. V, No. N, October 2003. 4 usually abbreviated as simply # x.B or as if the type information is either simple to infer or not important

Coverage checking is the problem of deciding whether any closed term of a given type is an instance of at least one of a given set of patterns. It can be used to verify if a function defined by pattern matching covers all possible cases. This problem has a straightforward solution for the first-order, simply-typed case, but is in general undecidable in the presence of dependent types. In this paper we present a terminating algorithm for verifying coverage of higher-order, dependently typed patterns.

Abstract We present the type theory LTT, intended to form a basis for typed target languages, providing an internal notion of logical proposition and proof. The inclusion of explicit proofs allows the type system to guarantee properties that would otherwise be incompatible with decidable type checking. LTT also provides linear facilities for tracking ephemeral properties that hold only for certain program states. Our type theory allows for re-use of typechecking software by casting a variety of type systems within a single language. We provide additional re-use with a framework for modular development of operational semantics. This framework allows independent type systems and their operational semantics to be joined together, automatically inheriting the type safety properties of those individual systems.

Elf is a general meta-language for the specification and implementation of logical systems in the style of the logical framework LF. Based on a logic programming interpretation, it supports executing logical systems and reasoning with and about them, thereby reducing the effort required for each particular logical system. The traditional logic programming paradigm is extended by replacing first-order terms with dependently typed -terms and allowing implication and universal quantification in the bodies of clauses. These higher-order features allow us to model concisely and elegantly conditions on variables and the discharge of assumptions which are prevalent in many logical systems. However, many specifications are not executable under the traditional logic programming semantics and performance may be hampered by redundant computation. To address these problems, I propose a tabled higher-order logic programming interpretation for Elf. Some redundant computation is eliminated by memoizing sub-computation and re-using its result later. If we do not distinguish different proofs for a property, then search based on tabled logic programming is complete and terminates for programs with bounded recursion. In this proposal, I present a proof-theoretical characterization for tabled higher-order logic programming. It is the basis of the implemented prototype for tabled logic programming interpreter for Elf. Preliminary experiments indicate that many more logical specifications are executable under the tabled semantics. In addition, tabled computation leads to more efficient execution of programs. The goal of the thesis is to demonstrate that tabled logic programming allows us to efficiently automate reasoning with and about logical systems in the logical f...

This paper describes a calculus of partial recursive functions that range over arbitrary and possibly higher-order objects in LF [HHP93]. Its most novel features include recursion under lambda-binders and matching against dynamically introduced parameters.

Abstract. Proof search has been used to specify a wide range of computation systems. In order to build a framework for reasoning about such specifications, we make use of a sequent calculus involving induction and co-induction. These proof principles are based on a proof theoretic (rather than set-theoretic) notion of definition [13, 20, 25, 51]. Definitions are akin to (stratified) logic programs, where the left and right rules for defined atoms allow one to view theories as “closed ” or defining fixed points. The use of definitions makes it possible to reason intensionally about syntax, in particular enforcing free equality via unification. We add in a consistent way rules for pre and post fixed points, thus allowing the user to reason inductively and co-inductively about properties of computational system making full use of higher-order abstract syntax. Consistency is guaranteed via cut-elimination, where we give the first, to our knowledge, cut-elimination procedure in the presence of general inductive and co-inductive definitions. 1

The logical framework LF is a constructive type theory of dependent functions that can elegantly encode many other logical systems. Prior work has studied the benefits of extending it to the linear logical framework LLF, for the incorporation linear logic features into the type theory affords good representations of state change. We describe and argue for the usefulness of an extension of LF by features inspired by hybrid logic, which has several benefits. For one, it shows how linear logic features can be decomposed into primitive operations manipulating abstract resource labels. More importantly, it makes it possible to realize a metalogical framework capable of reasoning about stateful deductive systems encoded in the style familiar from prior work with LLF, taking advantage of familiar methodologies used for metatheoretic reasoning in LF.Acknowledgments From the very first computer science course I took at CMU, Frank Pfenning has been an exceptional teacher and mentor. For his patience, breadth of knowledge, and mathematical good taste I am extremely thankful. No less do I owe to the other two major contributors to my programming languages

This paper compares two different styles of reasoning with inductively defined predicates, each style being encapsulated by a corresponding sequent calculus proof system. The first system supports traditional proof by induction, with induction rules formulated as sequent rules for introducing inductively defined predicates on the left of sequents. We show this system to be cut-free complete with respect to a natural class of Henkin models; the eliminability of cut follows as a corollary. The second system uses infinite (non-well-founded) proofs to represent arguments by infinite descent. In this system, the left rules for inductively defined predicates are simple case-split rules, and an infinitary, global condition on proof trees is required to ensure soundness. We show this system to be cut-free complete with respect to standard models, and again infer the eliminability of cut. The second infinitary system is unsuitable for formal reasoning. However, it has a natural restriction to proofs given by regular trees, i.e. to those proofs representable by finite graphs. This restricted “cyclic ” system subsumes the first system for proof by induction. We conjecture that the two systems are in fact equivalent, i.e., that proof by induction is equivalent to regular proof by infinite descent.

This paper explores a new point in the design space of functional programming: functional programming with dependently-typed higher-order data structures described in the logical framework LF. This allows us to program with proofs as higher-order data. We present a decidable bidirectional type system that distinguishes between dependentlytyped data and computations. To support reasoning about open data, our foundation makes contexts explicit. This provides us with a concise characterization of open data, which is crucial to elegantly describe proofs. In addition, we present an operational semantics for this language based on higher-order pattern matching for dependently typed objects. Based on this development, we prove progress and preservation.

Abstract. We discuss coverage checking for data that is dependently typed and is defined using higher-order abstract syntax. Unlike previous work on coverage checking that required objects to be closed, we consider open data objects, i.e. objects that may depend on some context. Our work may therefore provide insights into coverage checking in Twelf, and serve as a basis for coverage checking in functional languages such as Delphin and Beluga. More generally, our work is a foundation for proofs by case analysis in systems that reason about higher-order abstract syntax. 1