A proof of Higman's lemma by structural induction
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Applying Gödel's Dialectica Interpretation to Obtain a Constructive Proof of Higman's Lemma
We use Gödel's Dialectica interpretation to analyse Nash-Williams' elegant but non-constructive 'minimal bad sequence' proof of Higman's Lemma. The result is a concise constructive proof of the lemma (for arbitrary decidable well-quasi-orders) in which Nash-Williams' combinatorial idea is clearly present, along with an explicit program for finding an embedded pair in sequences of words.
متن کاملFrom Proofs to Programs in the Minlog System the Warshall Algorithm and Higman's Lemma
The Warshall algorithm computing the transitive closure of a relation is extracted from a constructive proof that repetitions in a path can always be avoided. Secondly a nonconstructive proof of a special case of Higman's lemma is transformed into a constructive proof. From the latter an eecient program is extracted. Both examples are implemented in the interactive theorem prover Minlog develop...
متن کاملHigman's Lemma in Type Theory
This thesis is about exploring the possibilities of a limited version of Martin-L of's type theory. This exploration consists both of metatheoretical considerations and of the actual use of that version of type theory to prove Higman's lemma. The thesis is organized in two papers, one in which type theory itself is studied and one in which it is used to prove Higman's lemma. In the rst paper, ...
متن کاملAn Inductive Version of Nash-Williams' Minimal-Bad-Sequence Argument for Higman's Lemma
Higman’s lemma has a very elegant, non-constructive proof due to Nash-Williams [NW63] using the so-called minimal-bad-sequence argument. The objective of the present paper is to give a proof that uses the same combinatorial idea, but is constructive. For a two letter alphabet this was done by Coquand and Fridlender [CF94]. Here we present a proof in a theory of inductive definitions that works ...
متن کاملA simple proof of Zariski's Lemma
Our aim in this very short note is to show that the proof of the following well-known fundamental lemma of Zariski follows from an argument similar to the proof of the fact that the rational field $mathbb{Q}$ is not a finitely generated $mathbb{Z}$-algebra.
متن کامل