Paper/document/root.tex
author urbanc
Mon, 07 Feb 2011 20:30:10 +0000
changeset 75 d63baacbdb16
parent 61 070f543e2560
child 82 14b12b5de6d3
permissions -rw-r--r--
parts of the 3 section

\documentclass{llncs}
\usepackage{isabelle}
\usepackage{isabellesym}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{pgf}
\usepackage{pdfsetup}
\usepackage{ot1patch}
\usepackage{times}
\usepackage{proof}
\usepackage{stmaryrd}

\urlstyle{rm}
\isabellestyle{it}
\renewcommand{\isastyleminor}{\it}%
\renewcommand{\isastyle}{\normalsize\it}%


\def\dn{\,\stackrel{\mbox{\scriptsize def}}{=}\,}
\renewcommand{\isasymequiv}{$\dn$}
\renewcommand{\isasymemptyset}{$\varnothing$}
\renewcommand{\isacharunderscore}{\mbox{$\_\!\_$}}


\begin{document}

\title{A Formalisation of the Myhill-Nerode Theorem\\ based on Regular
  Expressions (Proof Pearl)}
\author{Chunhan Wu\inst{1} \and Xingjuan Zhang\inst{1} \and Christian Urban\inst{2}}
\institute{PLA University, China \and TU Munich, Germany}
\maketitle

\begin{abstract} 
There are numerous textbooks on regular languages. Nearly all of them 
introduce the subject by describing finite automata and 
only mentioning on the side a connection with regular expressions. 
Unfortunately, automata are a hassle for formalisations in HOL-based
theorem provers. The reason is that they need to be represented as graphs 
or matrices, neither of which can be defined as inductive datatype. Also 
operations, such as disjoint unions of graphs, are not easily formalisiable 
in HOL. In contrast, regular expressions can be defined conveniently 
as datatype and a corresponding reasoning infrastructure comes for 
free. We show in this paper that a central result from formal 
language theory---the Myhill-Nerode theorem---can be recreated 
using only regular expressions. 
\end{abstract}


\input{session}

\bibliographystyle{plain}
\bibliography{root}

\end{document}

%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: t
%%% End: