CARIBOO: A Multi-Strategy Termination Proof Tool Based on Induction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1 A termination proof tool for rule-based programs CARIBOO is a termination proof tool for rule-based programming languages, where a program is a rewrite system and query evaluation consists in rewriting a ground expression [3]. It applies to languages such as ASF+SDF, Maude, Cafe-OBJ, or ELAN. By contrast with most of the existing tools, which prove in general termination of standard rewriting (rewriting without strategy) on the free term algebra, our proof tool, named CARIBOO (for Computing AbstRaction for Induction Based termination prOOfs), allows proving termination under specific reduction strategies, which becomes of special interest when the computations diverge for standard rewriting. It deals in particular with: the innermost strategy, specially useful when the rule-based formalism expresses functional programs, and central in the evaluation process of ELAN, local strategies on operators, provided in OBJ-like languages, and allowing to control evaluation strategies in a very fine local way, the outermost strategy, useful to avoid evaluations known to be non terminating for the standard strategy, to make strategy computations shorter, and used for interpreters and compilers using call by name. 2 Proving termination by explicit induction
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".