A Framework for De ning LogicsRobert Harper

The Edinburgh Logical Framework (LF) provides a means to deene (or present) logics. It is based on a general treatment of syntax, rules, and proofs by means of a typed-calculus with dependent types. Syntax is treated in a style similar to, but more general than, Martin-LL of's system of arities. The treatment of rules and proofs focuses on his notion of a judgement. Logics are represented in LF via a new principle, the judgements as types principle, whereby each judgement is identiied with the type of its proofs. This allows for a smooth treatment of discharge and variable occurrence conditions and leads to a uniform treatment of rules and proofs whereby rules are viewed as proofs of higher-order judgements and proof checking is reduced to type checking. The practical beneet of our treatment of formal systems is that logic-independent tools such as proof editors and proof checkers can be constructed.

[1]  Alonzo Church,et al.  A formulation of the simple theory of types , 1940, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[2]  D. Prawitz.  Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study , 1965 .

[3]  J. A. Robinson,et al.  A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle , 1965, JACM.

[4]  William A. Howard,et al.  The formulae-as-types notion of construction , 1969 .

[5]  Peter B. Andrews.  Resolution in type theory , 1971, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[6]  P. Martin-Löf.  An Intuitionistic Theory of Types: Predicative Part , 1975 .

[7]  Gordon D. Plotkin,et al.  Call-by-Name, Call-by-Value and the lambda-Calculus , 1975, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Per Martin-Löuf.  About Models for Intuitionistic Type Theories and the Notion of Definitional Equality , 1975 .

[9]  Robin Milner,et al.  Edinburgh lcf: a mechanized logic of computation , 1978 .

[10]  F. Dick.  A survey of the project Automath , 1980 .

[11]  William F. Clocksin,et al.  Programming in Prolog , 1987, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[12]  Peter Schroeder-Heister,et al.  A natural extension of natural deduction , 1984, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[13]  Thierry Coquand,et al.  Constructions: A Higher Order Proof System for Mechanizing Mathematics , 1985, European Conference on Computer Algebra.

[14]  Lawrence C. Paulson.  Natural deduction proof as higher-order resolution , 1985 .

[15]  Per Martin-Löf,et al.  Constructive mathematics and computer programming , 1984 .

[16]  Rance Cleaveland,et al.  Implementing mathematics with the Nuprl proof development system , 1986 .

[17]  Timothy G. Griffin.  An Environment for Formal Systems , 1987 .

[18]  Thierry Coquand,et al.  The Calculus of Constructions , 1988, Inf. Comput..

[19]  Peter Aczel,et al.  The notion of a framework and a framework for LTC , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. Third Annual Information Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[20]  Ian A. Mason,et al.  An overview of the Edinburgh logical framework , 1989 .

[21]  Robert L. Constable,et al.  Nuprl as a General Logic , 1989 .

[22]  Amy P. Felty,et al.  Specifying and implementing theorem provers in a higher-order logic programming language , 1989 .

[23]  Thomas W. Reps,et al.  The Synthesizer Generator Reference Manual , 1989, Texts and Monographs in Computer Science.