Results 1 
6 of
6
A Trustworthy Proof Checker
 IN ILIANO CERVESATO, EDITOR, WORKSHOP ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF COMPUTER SECURITY
, 2002
"... ProofCarrying Code (PCC) and other applications in computer security require machinecheckable proofs of properties of machinelanguage programs. The main advantage of the PCC approach is that the amount of code that must be explicitly trusted is very small: it consists of the logic in which predic ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
ProofCarrying Code (PCC) and other applications in computer security require machinecheckable proofs of properties of machinelanguage programs. The main advantage of the PCC approach is that the amount of code that must be explicitly trusted is very small: it consists of the logic in which predicates and proofs are expressed, the safety predicate, and the proof checker. We have built a minimal proof checker, and we explain its design principles, and the representation issues of the logic, safety predicate, and safety proofs. We show that the trusted computing base (TCB) in such a system can indeed be very small. In our current system the TCB is less than 2,700 lines of code (an order of magnitude smaller even than other PCC systems) which adds to our confidence of its correctness.
Rulebased Deduction and Views in Mathematica
, 2003
"... Abstract. We propose a rulebased system built on top of the capabilities of Mathematica to program nondeterministic and partially defined computations. The system is called ρLog and has primitive operators for defining elementary rules and for computing with unions, compositions, reflexivetransit ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We propose a rulebased system built on top of the capabilities of Mathematica to program nondeterministic and partially defined computations. The system is called ρLog and has primitive operators for defining elementary rules and for computing with unions, compositions, reflexivetransitive closures, and normal forms of rule applications. Moreover, ρLog can compute proof objects, which are internal representations of deduction derivations which respect a specification given by the user. We describe the programming principles and constructs of ρLog, the structures used to encode deduction derivations, and the methods provided to manipulate and visualize them. 1
Mathematical Knowledge Management 2003 Preliminary Version Deduction and Presentation in aeLog
"... Abstract We describe the deductive and proof presentation capabilities of a rulebased system implemented in Mathematica. The system can compute proof objects, which are internal representations of deduction derivations which respect a specification given by the user. It can also visualize such dedu ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract We describe the deductive and proof presentation capabilities of a rulebased system implemented in Mathematica. The system can compute proof objects, which are internal representations of deduction derivations which respect a specification given by the user. It can also visualize such deductions in human readable format, at various levels of detail. The presentation of the computed proof objects is done in a naturallanguage style which is derived and simplified for our needs from the proof presentation styles of Theorema. Key words: Rulebased deduction, proof presentation, rewriting. 1 Introduction aeLog is a renamed version of the rulebased programming system FunLog [7,8]. We did this in order to avoid confusing it with FUNLOG [11], a programming system of the eighties. aeLog is a suitable environment for specifying and implementing deduction systems in a language based on rules whose application is controlled by userdefined strategies. More precisely, aeLog allows:
Deduction and Presentation in ρLog
, 2003
"... We describe the deductive and proof presentation capabilities of a rulebased system implemented in Mathematica. The system can compute proof objects, which are internal representations of deduction derivations which respect a specification given by the user. It can also visualize such deductions in ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We describe the deductive and proof presentation capabilities of a rulebased system implemented in Mathematica. The system can compute proof objects, which are internal representations of deduction derivations which respect a specification given by the user. It can also visualize such deductions in human readable format, at various levels of detail. The presentation of the computed proof objects is done in a naturallanguage style which is derived and simplified for our needs from the proof presentation styles of Theorema.
A Proof Markup Language for Semantic Web Services
"... Abstract The Semantic Web is being designed to enable automated reasoners to be used as core components in a wide variety of Web applications and services. In order for a client to accept and trust a result produced by perhaps an unfamiliar Web service, the result needs to be accompanied by a justi ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract The Semantic Web is being designed to enable automated reasoners to be used as core components in a wide variety of Web applications and services. In order for a client to accept and trust a result produced by perhaps an unfamiliar Web service, the result needs to be accompanied by a justification that is understandable and usable by the client. in this paper, we describe the Proof Markup Language (PML), an interlingua representation for justifications of results produced by Semantic Web services. We also introduce our Inference Web infrastructure that uses PML as the foundation for providing explanations of Web services to end users. We additionally show how PML is critical for and provides the foundation for hybrid reasoning where results are produced cooperatively by multiple reasoners. Our contributions in this paper focus on technological foundations for capturing formal representations of term meaning and justification descriptions thereby facilitating trust and reuse of answers from web agents.
Automated Theorem Prover for Pointer Logic
"... Abstract: This paper presents a technique for designing theorem prover which mainly based on transformation and substitution for Pointer Logic. The technique realized as a tool called APL is implemented. The APL theorem prover is fully automated with which proofs can be recorded and checked efficie ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract: This paper presents a technique for designing theorem prover which mainly based on transformation and substitution for Pointer Logic. The technique realized as a tool called APL is implemented. The APL theorem prover is fully automated with which proofs can be recorded and checked efficiently. The tool is tested on pointer programs mainly about singlylinked lists, doublylinked lists and binary trees.