--- a/Paper.thy Sat Jan 05 00:31:43 2013 +0000
+++ b/Paper.thy Sun Jan 06 23:50:24 2013 +0000
@@ -60,27 +60,28 @@
theorem provers, like Isabelle/HOL, are at their best when the
data-structures at hand are ``structurally'' defined, like lists,
natural numbers, regular expressions, etc. Such data-structures come
-in theorem provers with convenient reasoning infrastructures (for
+convenient reasoning infrastructures (for
example induction principles, recursion combinators and so on). But
this is \emph{not} the case with Turing machines (and also not with
register machines): underlying their definition is a set of states
together with a transition function, both of which are not
structurally defined. This means we have to implement our own
reasoning infrastructure in order to prove properties about them. This
-leads to annoyingly lengthy and detailed formalisations. We noticed
+leads to annoyingly lengthy and fiddly formalisations. We noticed
first the difference between both structural and non-structural
``worlds'' when formalising the Myhill-Nerode theorem, where regular
expressions fared much better than automata \cite{WuZhangUrban11}.
However, with Turing machines there seems to be no alternative if one
-wants to formalise the great many proofs that use them. We give as
-example one proof---undecidability of Wang tilings---in Section
-\ref{Wang}. The standard proof of this property uses the notion of
-\emph{universal Turing machines}.
+wants to formalise the great many proofs from the literature that use them.
+We will analyse one example---undecidability of Wang tilings---in
+detail in Section~\ref{Wang}. The standard proof of this property uses
+the notion of \emph{universal Turing machines}.
We are not the first who formalised Turing machines in a theorem
prover: we are aware of the preliminary work by Asperti and Ricciotti
-\cite{AspertiRicciotti12}. They describe a formalisation of Turing
-machines in the Matita theorem prover. They report
+\cite{AspertiRicciotti12}. They describe a complete formalisation of Turing
+machines in the Matita theorem prover, including an universal Turing
+machine. They report
that the informal proofs from which they started are not
``sufficiently accurate to be directly used as a guideline for
formalization'' \cite[Page 2]{AspertiRicciotti12}. For our formalisation
@@ -92,20 +93,26 @@
$n$-ary functions. Similarly, when compiling recursive functions to
abacus machines, the textbook again only shows how it can be done for
2- and 3-ary functions, but in the formalisation we need arbitrary
-function. But the general ideas for how to do this are clear enough in
+functions. But the general ideas for how to do this are clear enough in
\cite{Boolos87}.
The main difference between our formalisation and the one by Asperti and
-Ricciotti is
+Ricciotti is that their universal Turing
+machine uses a different alphabet than the machines it simulates. They
+write \cite[Page XXX]{AspertiRicciotti12}:
-that their universal machines
-
-\begin{quote}
+\begin{quote}\it
``In particular, the fact that the universal machine operates with a
different alphabet with respect to the machines it simulates is
annoying.''
\end{quote}
+\noindent
+In this paper we follow the approach by Boolos et al \cite{Boolos87}
+where Turing machines (and our
+universal Turing machine) operates on tapes that contain only blank
+or filled cells (respectively represented by 0 and 1---or in our
+formalisation by @{term Bk} or @{term Oc}).
--- a/document/root.bib Sat Jan 05 00:31:43 2013 +0000
+++ b/document/root.bib Sun Jan 06 23:50:24 2013 +0000
@@ -38,10 +38,10 @@
}
@book{Boolos87,
- author = {G.~Boolos and R.~C.~Jeffrey},
- title = {{C}omputability and {L}ogic (2.~ed.)},
+ author = {G.~Boolos and J.~P.~Burgess and R.~C.~Jeffrey},
+ title = {{C}omputability and {L}ogic (5th~ed.)},
publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
- year = {1987}
+ year = {2007}
}
@inproceedings{WuZhangUrban11,
--- a/document/root.tex Sat Jan 05 00:31:43 2013 +0000
+++ b/document/root.tex Sun Jan 06 23:50:24 2013 +0000
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
\author{
-\IEEEauthorblockN{Xu Jian, Xingyuan Zhang}
+\IEEEauthorblockN{Jian Xu, Xingyuan Zhang}
\IEEEauthorblockA{PLA University of Science and Technology Nanjing, China}
\and
\IEEEauthorblockN{Christian Urban}
Binary file paper.pdf has changed