2018•arXiv (Cornell University)Open access

Automated Proofs of Unique Normal Forms w.r.t. Conversion for Term Rewriting Systems

Takahito Aoto, Yoshihito Toyama

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The notion of normal forms is ubiquitous in various equivalent transformations. Confluence (CR), one of the central properties of term rewriting systems (TRSs), concerns uniqueness of normal forms. Yet another such property, which is weaker than confluence, is the property of unique normal forms w.r.t. conversion (UNC). Famous examples having UNC but not CR include the TRSs consisting of S,K,I-rules for the combinatory logic supplemented with various pairing rules (de Vrijer, 1999). Recently, automated confluence proof of TRSs has caught attentions leading to investigations of automatable methods for (dis)proving CR of TRSs; some powerful confluence tools have been developed as well. In contrast, there have been little efforts on (dis)proving UNC automatically yet. Indeed, there are few tools that are capable of (dis)proving UNC; furthermore, only few UNC criteria have been elaborated in these tools. In this paper, we address automated methods to prove or disprove UNC of given TRSs. We report automation of some criteria known so far, and also present some new criteria and methods for proving or disproving UNC. Presented methods are implemented over the confluence prover ACP (Aoto et al., 2009) and an experimental evaluation is reported.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The notion of normal forms is ubiquitous in various equivalent transformations. Confluence (CR), one of the central properties of term rewriting systems (TRSs), concerns uniqueness of normal forms. Yet another such property, which is weaker than confluence, is the property of unique normal forms w.r.t. conversion (UNC). Famous examples having UNC but not CR include the TRSs consisting of S,K,I-rules for the combinatory logic supplemented with various pairing rules (de Vrijer, 1999). Recently, automated confluence proof of TRSs has caught attentions leading to investigations of automatable methods for (dis)proving CR of TRSs; some powerful confluence tools have been developed as well. In contrast, there have been little efforts on (dis)proving UNC automatically yet. Indeed, there are few tools that are capable of (dis)proving UNC; furthermore, only few UNC criteria have been elaborated in these tools. In this paper, we address automated methods to prove or disprove UNC of given TRSs. We report automation of some criteria known so far, and also present some new criteria and methods for proving or disproving UNC. Presented methods are implemented over the confluence prover ACP (Aoto et al., 2009) and an experimental evaluation is reported.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The notion of normal forms is ubiquitous in various equivalent transformations. Confluence (CR), one of the central properties of term rewriting systems (TRSs), concerns uniqueness of normal forms. Yet another such property, which is weaker than confluence, is the property of unique normal forms w.r.t. conversion (UNC). Famous examples having UNC but not CR include the TRSs consisting of S,K,I-rules for the combinatory logic supplemented with various pairing rules (de Vrijer, 1999). Recently, automated confluence proof of TRSs has caught attentions leading to investigations of automatable methods for (dis)proving CR of TRSs; some powerful confluence tools have been developed as well. In contrast, there have been little efforts on (dis)proving UNC automatically yet. Indeed, there are few tools that are capable of (dis)proving UNC; furthermore, only few UNC criteria have been elaborated in these tools. In this paper, we address automated methods to prove or disprove UNC of given TRSs. We report automation of some criteria known so far, and also present some new criteria and methods for proving or disproving UNC. Presented methods are implemented over the confluence prover ACP (Aoto et al., 2009) and an experimental evaluation is reported.

Key concepts: Confluence, Rewriting, Mathematical proof, Gas meter prover, Term (time), Computer science, Property (philosophy), Uniqueness

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Automated Proofs of Unique Normal Forms w.r.t. Conversion for Term Rewriting Systems — Research Paper | ScholarLens