A proof-checker for dynamic logic

Authors:
S. D. Litvintchouk;V. R. Pratt
Affiliations:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA;Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
Venue:
IJCAI'77 Proceedings of the 5th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Year:
1977

Citing 11
Cited 0

Introduction to mathematical logic (3rd ed.)

Introduction to mathematical logic (3rd ed.)
A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
An axiomatic basis for computer programming

Communications of the ACM
A Discipline of Programming

A Discipline of Programming
Computability and completeness in logics of programs (Preliminary Report)

STOC '77 Proceedings of the ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Propositional modal logic of programs

STOC '77 Proceedings of the ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Implementation and applications of Scott's logic for computable functions

Proceedings of ACM conference on Proving assertions about programs
Is “sometime” sometimes better than “always”?: Intermittent assertions in proving program correctness

ICSE '76 Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Software engineering
The translation of ''go to'' programs to ''while'' programs

The translation of ''go to'' programs to ''while'' programs
Constructive Methods in Program Verification

IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Semantical consideration on floyo-hoare logic

SFCS '76 Proceedings of the 17th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We consider the problem of getting a computer to follow reasoning conducted in dynamic logic. This is a recently developed logic of programs that subsumes most existing first-order logics of programs that manipulate their environment, including Floyd's and Hoare's logics of partial correctness and Manna and Waldinger's logic of total correctness. Dynamic logic is more closely related to classical first-order logic than any other proposed logic of programs. This simplifies the design of a proof-checker for dynamic logic. Work in progress on the implementation of such a program is reported on, and an example machine-checked proof is exhibited.