skip to main content
research-article

Normal Higher-Order Termination

Published:09 March 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We extend the termination proof methods based on reduction orderings to higher-order rewriting systems based on higher-order pattern matching. We accommodate, on the one hand, a weakly polymorphic, algebraic extension of Church’s simply typed λ-calculus and, on the other hand, any use of eta, as a reduction, as an expansion, or as an equation. The user’s rules may be of any type in this type system, either a base, functional, or weakly polymorphic type.

References

  1. 1991. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS’91). IEEE Computer Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Hendrick Pieter Barendregt. 1993. Lambda calculus with types. In Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, Volume 2, Abramsky et al. (Eds.). Oxford University Press, 117--309.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Frédéric Blanqui. 2006. Higher-order dependency pairs. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Termination (WST’06).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Frédéric Blanqui. 2007. Computability closure: Ten years later. In Rewriting, Computation and Proof (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Hubert Comon-Lundh, Claude Kirchner, and Hélène Kirchner (Eds.), Vol. 4600. Springer, 68--88.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Frédéric Blanqui, Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, and Mitsuhiro Okada. 1999. The calculus of algebraic constructions. In RTA (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Paliath Narendran and Michaël Rusinowitch (Eds.), Vol. 1631. Springer, 301--316. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Frédéric Blanqui, Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, and Mitsuhiro Okada. 2002. Inductive-data-type systems. Theoretical Computer Science 272, 1--2 (2002), 41--68. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Frédéric Blanqui, Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, and Albert Rubio. 2008. The computability path ordering: The end of a quest. In CSL (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Michael Kaminski and Simone Martini (Eds.), Vol. 5213. Springer, 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Frédéric Blanqui, Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, and Albert Rubio. 2013. The Computability Path Ordering. (2013). Accepted for publication in Logical Methods for Computer Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Miquel Bofill, Cristina Borralleras, Enric Rodrguez-Carbonell, and Albert Rubio. 2012. The recursive path and polynomial ordering for first-order and higher-order terms. Journal of Logic and Computation (2012). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exs027 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Cristina Borralleras and Albert Rubio. 2001. A monotonic higher-order semantic path ordering. In LPAR (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Robert Nieuwenhuis and Andrei Voronkov (Eds.), Vol. 2250. Springer, 531--547. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Roberto Di Cosmo and Delia Kesner. 1994. Simulating expansions without expansions. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 4, 3 (1994), 315--362.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Nachum Dershowitz. 1982. Orderings for term-rewriting systems. Theoretical Computer Science 17 (1982), 279--301.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Nachum Dershowitz and Jean-Pierre Jouannaud. 1990. Rewrite systems. In Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics (B). Elsevier, 243--320. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Carsten Fuhs and Cynthia Kop. 2012. Polynomial interpretations for higher-order rewriting. In RTA (LIPIcs), Ashish Tiwari (Ed.), Vol. 15. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 176--192.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Gérard P. Huet. 1980. Confluent reductions: Abstract properties and applications to term rewriting systems: Abstract properties and applications to term rewriting systems. Journal of the ACM 27, 4 (1980), 797--821. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/322217.322230 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud. 2005. Higher-order rewriting: Framework, confluence and termination. In Processes, Terms and Cycles: Steps on the Road to Infinity, Essays Dedicated to Jan Willem Klop, on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Aart Middeldorp, Vincent van Oostrom, Femke van Raamsdonk, and Roel C. de Vrijer (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3838. Springer, 224--250. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Hélène Kirchner. 1986. Completion of a set of rules modulo a set of equations. SIAM Journal of Computing 15, 4 (1986), 1155--1194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Jianqi Li. 2012. Church-rosser properties of normal rewriting. In CSL (LIPIcs), Patrick Cégielski and Arnaud Durand (Eds.), Vol. 16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 350--365.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Mitsuhiro Okada. 1991. A computation model for executable higher-order algebraic specification languages. In LICS. IEEE Computer Society, 350--361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Albert Rubio. 1999. The higher-order recursive path ordering. In LICS. IEEE Computer Society, 402--411. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Albert Rubio. 2006. Higher-order orderings for normal rewriting. In RTA (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), F. Pfenning (Ed.), Vol. 4098. Springer, 387--399. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jean-Pierre Jouannaud and Albert Rubio. 2007. Polymorphic higher-order recursive path orderings. Journal of the ACM 54, 1 (2007), Article No. 2, 48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Cynthia Kop. 2012. Higher Order Termination. Ph.D. Dissertation. VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Cynthia Kop and Femke van Raamsdonk. 2010. Higher-order dependency pairs with argument filterings. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Termination (WST’10).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Keiichirou Kusakari, Yasuo Isogai, Masahiko Sakai, and Frédéric Blanqui. 2009. Static dependency pair method based on strong computability for higher-order rewrite systems. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems E92-D, 10 (2009), 2007--2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Richard Mayr and Tobias Nipkow. 1998. Higher-order rewrite systems and their confluence. Theoretical Computer Science 192, 1 (1998), 3--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Aart Middeldorp, Vincent van Oostrom, Femke van Raamsdonk, and Roel C. de Vrijer (Eds.). 2005. Processes, Terms and Cycles: Steps on the Road to Infinity, Essays Dedicated to Jan Willem Klop, on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3838. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Dale Miller. 1991. A logic programming language with lambda-abstraction, function variables, and simple unification. Journal of Logical Computing 1, 4 (1991), 497--536.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Tobias Nipkow. 1991. Higher-order critical pairs. In LICS. IEEE Computer Society, 342--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Tobias Nipkow and Lawrence C. Paulson. 1992. Isabelle-91. In CADE (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Deepak Kapur (Ed.), Vol. 607. Springer, 673--676. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Gerald E. Peterson and Mark E. Stickel. 1981. Complete sets of reductions for some equational theories. Journal of the ACM 28, 2 (1981), 233--264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Jaco van de Pol. 1996. Termination of Higher-Order Rewrite Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. Utrecht Universiteit, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Masahiko Sakai and Keiichirou Kusakari. 2005. On dependency pair method for proving termination of higher-order rewrite systems. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems E88-D, 3 (2005), 583--593. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Masahiko Sakai, Yoshitsugu Watanabe, and Toshiki Sakabe. 2001. An extension of dependency pair method for proving termination of higher-order rewrite systems. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems E84-D, 8 (2001), 1025--1032.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Sho Suzuki, Keiichirou Kusakari, and Frédéric Blanqui. 2011. Argument filterings and usable rules in higher-order rewrite systems. IPSJ Transactions on Programming 4, 2 (2011), 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Terese. 2003. Term rewriting systems. In Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Marc Bezem, Jan Willem Klop, and Roel de Vrijer (Eds.). Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Jaco van de Pol. 1993. Termination proofs for higher-order rewrite systems. In HOA (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Jan Heering, Karl Meinke, Bernhard Möller, and Tobias Nipkow (Eds.), Vol. 816. Springer, 305--325. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Jaco van de Pol and Helmut Schwichtenberg. 1995. Strict functionals for termination proofs. In TLCA (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Mariangiola Dezani-Ciancaglini and Gordon D. Plotkin (Eds.), Vol. 902. Springer, 350--364. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Femke van Raamsdonk. 2001. On termination of higher-order rewriting. In RTA (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Aart Middeldorp (Ed.), Vol. 2051. Springer, 261--275. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Daria Walukiewicz-Chrzaszcz. 2003. Termination of rewriting in the Calculus of Constructions. Journal of Functional Programming 13, 2 (2003), 339--414. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Normal Higher-Order Termination

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
            ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 16, Issue 2
            March 2015
            260 pages
            ISSN:1529-3785
            EISSN:1557-945X
            DOI:10.1145/2737801
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2015 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 9 March 2015
            • Accepted: 1 November 2014
            • Revised: 1 September 2014
            • Received: 1 December 2013
            Published in tocl Volume 16, Issue 2

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader