Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with proof-assistant
Search options not deleted
user 850
A proof assistant, or interactive theorem prover, is a software tool to assist with the development of formal proofs by human-machine collaboration.
3
votes
Is there any formalization (with any theorem prover) of the Bohm theorem for lambda-calculus?
Not sure whether this answers your request, but Łukasz Czajka has formalized in Coq his proof of confluence (and normalization) of the infinitary λ-calculus modulo (strongly) meaningless terms. In the …
- 229
9
votes
2
answers
499
views
Comparison between proof assistants for coinductive structures and proofs
I have a quite vague and naïve question: what are the differences between the different proof assistants regarding coinduction?
My motivation is that I'd like to formalize some proofs, basically about …
- 229