A List-machine Benchmark for Mechanized Metatheory

Authors:
Andrew W. Appel;Xavier Leroy
Affiliations:
Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, 35 Olden Street, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA and INRIA Rocquencourt, B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay, France;INRIA Rocquencourt, B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay, France
Venue:
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
Year:
2007

Citing 8
Cited 0

A mechanically verified language implementation

Journal of Automated Reasoning
A syntactic approach to type soundness

Information and Computation
Piton: a mechanically verified assembly-level language

Piton: a mechanically verified assembly-level language
Formal Verification of a Java Compiler in Isabelle

CADE-18 Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction
Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development

Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development
Towards the Formal Verification of a C0 Compiler: Code Generation and Implementation Correctnes

SEFM '05 Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods
Formal certification of a compiler back-end or: programming a compiler with a proof assistant

Conference record of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
A machine-checked model for a Java-like language, virtual machine, and compiler

ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We propose a benchmark to compare theorem-proving systems on their ability to express proofs of compiler correctness. In contrast to the first POPLmark, we emphasize the connection of proofs to compiler implementations, and we point out that much can be done without binders or alpha-conversion. We propose specific criteria for evaluating the utility of mechanized metatheory systems; we have constructed solutions in both Coq and Twelf metatheory, and we draw conclusions about those two systems in particular.