Skip to main content

Program extraction from classical proofs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 960))

Abstract

Different methods for extracting a program from a classical proof are investigated. A direct method based on normalization and the wellknown negative translation combined with a realizability interpretation are compared and shown to yield equal results. Furthermore, the translation method is refined in order to obtain optimized programs. An analysis of the proof translation shows that in many cases only small parts of a classical proof need to be translated. Proofs extracted from such refined translations have simpler type and control structure. The effect of the refinements is demonstrated at two examples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Coquand, T.: A proof of Higman's lemma by structural induction. Manuscript (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Friedman, H.: Classically and intuitionistically provably recursive functions. In: Higher Set Theory, SLNCS 699 (1978) 21–28

    Google Scholar 

  3. Higman, G.: Ordering by divisibility in abstract algebras. Proc. London Math. Soc. 2 (1952) 236–366

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kreisel, G.: Interpretation of analysis by means of constructive functionals of finite types. In: Constructivity in Mathematics, North-Holland, (1959) 101–128

    Google Scholar 

  5. Leivant, D.: Syntactic translations and provably recursive functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (1985), 682–688

    Google Scholar 

  6. Murthy, C.: Extracting Constructive Content from Classical Proofs. PhD thesis. Technical Report, Nr. 90-1151, Dep. of Comp. Science, Cornell Univ, Ithaca, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nash-Williams, C.: On well-quasi-ordering finite trees. Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 59 (1963) 833–835

    Google Scholar 

  8. Schütte, K., Simpson, S.G: Ein in der reinen Zahlentheorie unbeweisbarer Satz über endliche Folgen natürlicher Zahlen. Arch. Math. Logik 25 (1985) 75–89

    Google Scholar 

  9. Schwichtenberg, H.: Proofs as programs. In: Proof Theory. A selection of papers from the Leeds Proof Theory Programme 1990, Cambridge University Press (1992) 81–113

    Google Scholar 

  10. Troelstra, A. S., van Dalen, D.: Constructivism in Mathematics Vol. 1. An Introduction. In: Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland 121 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Troelstra, A. S.: Metamathematical Investigations of Intuitionistic Arithmetic and Analysis. SLNM 344 (1973)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Daniel Leivant

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Berger, U., Schwichtenberg, H. (1995). Program extraction from classical proofs. In: Leivant, D. (eds) Logic and Computational Complexity. LCC 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 960. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60178-3_80

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60178-3_80

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60178-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44720-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics