  Recursive relational specifications are commonly used to describe the
computational structure of formal systems. Recent research in proof theory has
identified two features that facilitate direct, logic-based reasoning about
such descriptions: the interpretation of atomic judgments through recursive
definitions and an encoding of binding constructs via generic judgments.
However, logics encompassing these two features do not currently allow for the
definition of relations that embody dynamic aspects related to binding, a
capability needed in many reasoning tasks. We propose a new relation between
terms called nominal abstraction as a means for overcoming this deficiency. We
incorporate nominal abstraction into a rich logic also including definitions,
generic quantification, induction, and co-induction that we then prove to be
consistent. We present examples to show that this logic can provide elegant
treatments of binding contexts that appear in many proofs, such as those
establishing properties of typing calculi and of arbitrarily cascading
substitutions that play a role in reducibility arguments.
