Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Crystal: Integrating Structured Queries into a Tactic Language

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present the language CRStL (Control Rule Strategy Language, pronounce “crystal”) to formulate mathematical reasoning techniques as proof strategies in the context of the proof assistant Ωmega. The language is arranged in two levels, a query language to access mathematical knowledge maintained in development graphs, and a strategy language to annotate the results of these queries with further control information. The two-leveled structure of the language allows the specification of proof techniques in a declarative way. We present the syntax and semantics of CRStL and illustrate its use by examples.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersen, F., Petersen, K.D.: Recursive boolean functions in HOL. In: Archer, M., Joyce, J.J., Levitt, K.N., Windley, P.J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1991 International Workshop on the HOL Theorem Proving System and its Applications, Davis, August 1991, pp. 367–377. IEEE Computer Society, Silver Spring (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asperti, A., Padovani, L., Coen, C.S., Guidi, F., Schena, I.: Mathematical knowledge management in helm. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 38(1–3), 27–46 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Asperti, A., Guidi, F., Coen, C.S., Tassi, E., Zacchiroli, S.: A content based mathematical search engine: whelp. In: Post-Proceedings of the Types 2004 International Conference. LNCS, vol. 3839, pp. 17–32. Springer, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Asperti, A., Coen, C.S., Tassi, E., Zacchiroli, S.: User interaction with the matita proof assistant. J. Autom. Reason. 39, 109–139 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Aspinall, D., Lüth, C., Wolff, B.: Assisted proof document authoring. In: Kohlhase, M. (ed.) Mathematical Knowledge Management MKM 2005, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3863, pp. 65–80. Springer, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Autexier, S.: The CoRe calculus. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) Proceedings of CADE-20, Tallinn, Estonia. LNAI, vol. 3632. Springer, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Autexier, S., Dietrich, D.: Synthesizing proof planning methods and Omega-Ants agents from mathematical knowledge. In: Borwein, J., Farmer, B. (eds.) Proceedings of MKM’06. LNAI, vol. 4108, pp. 94–109. Springer, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Autexier, S., Hutter, D.: Formal software development in maya. In: Hutter, D., Stephan, W. (eds.) Festschrift in Honor of J. Siekmann. LNAI, vol. 2605. Springer, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Autexier, S., Hutter, D., Mossakowski, T., Schairer, A.: The development graph manager MAYA. In: Kirchner, H., Ringeissen, Ce. (eds.) Proceedings 9th International Conference on Algebraic Methodology And Software Technology (AMAST’02). LNCS, vol. 2422. Springer, New York (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Autexier, S., Benzmüller, C., Dietrich, D., Wagner, M.: Organisation, transformation, and propagation of mathematical knowledge in omega. J. Math. Comput. Sci. 2, 253–277 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Bancerek, G.: Information retrieval and rendering with mml query. In: Proceedings of MKM’06, pp. 266–279. Springer, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bancerek, G., Rudnicki, P.: Information retrieval in mml. In: Proceedings of MKM’03, pp. 119–132. Springer, London (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barendregt, H., Wiedijk, F.: The challenge of computer mathematics. Philos. Trans.—Royal Soc., Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 363(1835), 2351–2375 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Bertot, Y., Castéran, P.: Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development—Coq’Art: The Calculus of Inductive Constructions. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. Springer, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Borovanský, P., Kirchner, H.: Strategies of elan: meta-interpretation and partial evaluation. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Theory and Practice of Algebraic Specifications ASF+SDF 97, Workshops in Computing. Springer, Amsterdam (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Borovansky, P., Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H., Ringeissen, C.: Rewriting with strategies in ELAN: a functional semantics. Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 12(1), 69–95 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Bundy, A.: The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In: Lusk. R., Overbeek, R. (eds.) Proceedings CADE-9. LNAI, pp. 111–120. Springer, New York (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Christian, J.: Flatterms, discrimination nets, and fast term rewriting. J. Autom. Reason. 10, 95–113 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Constable, R.L., Allen, S.F., Bromley, H., Cleaveland, W., Cremer, J., Harper, R., Howe, D.J., Knoblock, T., Mendler, N., Panangaden, P., Sasaki, J.T., Smith, S.F.: Implementing Mathematics with the Nuprl Development System. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Corbineau, P.: A declarative language for the coq proof assistant. In: Miculan, M., Scagnetto, I., Honsell, F. (eds.) TYPES. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4941, pp. 69–84. Springer, New York (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Delahaye, D.: A proof dedicated meta-language. In: Proceedings of Logical Frameworks and Meta-Languages (LFM), Copenhagen (Denmark). ENTCS, vol. 70(2). Elsevier, Amsterdam (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dietrich, D.: The task-layer of the Ωmega system. Diploma thesis, FR 6.2 Informatik, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken (2006)

  23. Dixon, L.: A proof planning framework for Isabelle. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh (2005)

  24. Dixon, L., Fleuriot, J.D.: A proof-centric approach to mathematical assistants. J. Appl. Logic 4(4), 505–532 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Farmer, W., Guttman, J., Thayer, F.J.: IMPS: an interactive mathematical proof system. J. Autom. Reason. 11, 653–654 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Geuvers, H.: Proof assistants: history, ideas and future. Sadahana 34, 3–25 (2009) (Special Issue on Interactive Theorem Proving and Proof Checking)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Geuvers, H., Mamane, L.E.L.: A document-oriented Coq Plugin for Texmacs (2006)

  28. Gordon, M.: From lcf to hol: a short history. In: Plotkin, G.D., Stirling, C., Tofte, M. (eds.) Proof, Language, and Interaction, pp. 169–186. MIT, Cambridge (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gordon, M.J., Milner, A.J., Wadsworth, C.P.: Edinburgh LCF—a mechanised logic of computation. In: LNCS, vol. 78. Springer, New York (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Harrison, J.: Hol light: a tutorial introduction. In: Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD’96), pp. 265–269. Springer, New York (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Huang, X.: Human oriented proof presentation: a reconstructive approach. In: DISKI, no. 112. Infix, Sankt Augustin (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Letichevsky, A.A.: Development of rewriting strategies. In: PLILP ’93: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Programming Language Implementation and Logic Programming, pp. 378–390. Springer, London (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Verdejo, A.: Towards a strategy language for Maude. In: Martí-Oliet, N. (ed.) Proceedings Fifth International Workshop on Rewriting Logic and its Applications, WRLA 2004, Barcelona, Spain, 27 March–4 April, 2004. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 117, pp. 417–441. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Meng, J., Paulson, L.C.: Lightweight relevance filtering for machine-generated resolution problems. J. Appl. Logic 7(1), 41–57 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.jal.2007.07.004

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Mosses, P.D. (ed.): CASL reference manual. In: LNCS, no. 2960. Springer, New York (2004)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Nipkow, T., Paulson, L.C., Wenzel, M.: Isabelle/HOL—a proof assistant for higher-order logic. In: LNCS, vol. 2283. Springer, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Paulson, L.C.: A higher-order implementation of rewriting. Sci. Comput. Program. 3(2), 119–149 (1983)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Reif, W., Schellhorn, G.: Theorem proving in large theories. In: Proc. FTP 97, pp. 119–124. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Richardson, J.: A semantics for proof plans with applications to interactive proof planning. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (2002)

  40. Richardson, J., Smaill, A., Green, I.: System description: proof planning in higher-order logic with clam. In: 15th International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1421, pp. 129–133. Springer, New York (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Siekmann, J., Benzmüller, C., Autexier, S.: Computer supported mathematics with omega. J. Appl. Logic 4(4), 533–559 (2006) (Special issue on Mathematics Assistance Systems)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Trybulec, A., Blair, H.: Computer assisted reasoning with Mizar. In: Joshi, A. (ed.) Proceedings of the 9th Int. Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence. M. Kaufmann (1985)

  43. Urban, J.: MoMM—fast interreduction and retrieval in large libraries of formalized mathematics. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools 15(1), 109–130 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Visser, E.: Stratego: a language for program transformation based on rewriting strategies. System description of Stratego 0.5. In: Middeldorp, A. (ed.) Rewriting Techniques and Applications (RTA 2001). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2051, pp. 357–361. Springer, New York (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Wallen, L.: Automated proof search in non-classical logics: efficient matrix proof methods for modal and intuitionistic logics. Series in Artificial Intelligence. MIT, Cambridge (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Weidenbach, C., Brahm, U., Hillenbrand, T., Keen, E., Theobalt, C., Topić, D.: SPASS version 2.0. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) Automated Deduction—CADE-18. LNAI, no. 2392 , pp. 275–279. Springer, New York (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Wenzel, M.: Isar—a generic interpretative approach to readable formal proof documents. In: Bertot, Y., Dowek, G., Hirschowitz, A., Paulin, C., Théry, L. (eds.) Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics: TPHOLs’99. LNCS, vol. 1690, pp. 167–184. Springer, New York (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DFKI-Labor Bremen, Safe and Secure Cognitive Systems, Enrique-Schmidt-Straße 5, 28359, Bremen, Germany

    Dominik Dietrich & Ewaryst Schulz

Authors
  1. Dominik Dietrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ewaryst Schulz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominik Dietrich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dietrich, D., Schulz, E. Crystal: Integrating Structured Queries into a Tactic Language. J Autom Reasoning 44, 79 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-009-9138-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-009-9138-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation