Powerful proof techniques, such as logical relation arguments, have been developed for establishing the strong normalisation property of term- rewriting systems. The first author used such a logical relation argument to establish strong normalising for a cut-elimination procedure in classical logic. He presented a rather complicated, but informal, proof establishing this property. The difficulties in this proof arise from a quite subtle substitution operation, which implements proof transformation that permute cuts over other inference rules. We have formalised this proof in the theorem prover Isabelle/HOL using the Nominal Datatype Package, closely following the informal proof given by the first author in his PhD-thesis. In the process, we identified and resolved a gap in one central lemma and a number of smaller problems in others. We also needed to make one informal definition rigorous. We thus show that the original proof is indeed a proof and that present automated proving technology is adequate for formalising such difficult proofs.
Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book
Please log in to get access to this content
To get access to this content you need the following product:
- Revisiting Cut-Elimination: One Difficult Proof Is Really a Proof
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Sequence number
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA