Brian E. Aydemir

Mechanized metatheory for the masses: the PoplMark challenge

How close are we to a world where every paper on programming languages is accompanied by an electronic appendix with machine-checked proofs? We propose an initial set of benchmarks for measuring progress in this area. Based on the metatheory of System F<:, a typed lambda-calculus with second-order polymorphism, subtyping, and records, these benchmarks embody many aspects of programming languages that are challenging to formalize: variable binding at both the term and type levels, syntactic forms with variable numbers of components (including binders), and proofs demanding complex induction principles. We hope that these benchmarks will help clarify the current state of the art, provide a basis for comparing competing technologies, and motivate further research.

Engineering formal metatheory

Machine-checked proofs of properties of programming languages have become acritical need, both for increased confidence in large and complex designsand as a foundation for technologies such as proof-carrying code. However, constructing these proofs remains a black art, involving many choices in the formulation of definitions and theorems that make a huge cumulative difference in the difficulty of carrying out large formal developments. There presentation and manipulation of terms with variable binding is a key issue. We propose a novel style for formalizing metatheory, combining locally nameless representation of terms and cofinite quantification of free variable names in inductivedefinitions of relations on terms (typing, reduction, ...). The key technical insight is that our use of cofinite quantification obviates the need for reasoning about equivariance (the fact that free names can be renamed in derivations); in particular, the structural induction principles of relations defined using cofinite quantification are strong enough for metatheoretic reasoning, and need not be explicitly strengthened. Strong inversion principles follow (automatically, in Coq) from the induction principles. Although many of the underlying ingredients of our technique have been used before, their combination here yields a significant improvement over other methodologies using first-order representations, leading to developments that are faithful to informal practice, yet require noexternal tool support and little infrastructure within the proof assistant. We have carried out several large developments in this style using the Coq proof assistant and have made them publicly available. Our developments include type soundness for System F sub; and core ML (with references, exceptions, datatypes, recursion, and patterns) and subject reduction for the Calculus of Constructions. Not only do these developments demonstrate the comprehensiveness of our approach; they have also been optimized for clarity and robustness, making them good templates for future extension.

MetaPRL – A Modular Logical Environment

MetaPRL is the latest system to come out of over twenty five years of research by the Cornell PRL group. While initially created at Cornell, MetaPRL is currently a collaborative project involving several universities in several countries. The MetaPRL system combines the properties of an interactive LCF-style tactic-based proof assistant, a logical framework, a logical programming environment, and a formal methods programming toolkit. MetaPRL is distributed under an open-source license and can be downloaded from http://metaprl.org/. This paper provides an overview of the system focusing on the features that did not exist in the previous generations of PRL systems.

Nominal Reasoning Techniques in Coq

We explore an axiomatized nominal approach to variable binding in Coq, using an untyped lambda-calculus as our test case. In our nominal approach, alpha-equality of lambda terms coincides with Coqs built-in equality. Our axiomatization includes a nominal induction principle and functions for calculating free variables and substitution. These axioms are collected in a module signature and proved sound using locally nameless terms as the underlying representation. Our experience so far suggests that it is feasible to work from such axiomatized theories in Coq and that the nominal style of variable binding corresponds closely with paper proofs. We are currently working on proving the soundness of a primitive recursion combinator and developing a method of generating these axioms and their proof of soundness from a grammar describing the syntax of terms and binding.