The dagger lambda calculus

We present a novel lambda calculus that casts the categorical approach to the study of quantum protocols into the rich and well established tradition of type theory. Our construction extends the linear typed lambda calculus with a linear negation of "trivialised" De Morgan duality. Reduction is realised through explicit substitution, based on a symmetric notion of binding of global scope, with rules acting on the entire typing judgement instead of on a specific subterm. Proofs of subject reduction, confluence, strong normalisation and consistency are provided, and the language is shown to be an internal language for dagger compact categories.Comment: In Proceedings QPL 2014, arXiv:1412.810

Canonical Proof nets for Classical Logic

Proof nets provide abstract counterparts to sequent proofs modulo rule permutations; the idea being that if two proofs have the same underlying proof-net, they are in essence the same proof. Providing a convincing proof-net counterpart to proofs in the classical sequent calculus is thus an important step in understanding classical sequent calculus proofs. By convincing, we mean that (a) there should be a canonical function from sequent proofs to proof nets, (b) it should be possible to check the correctness of a net in polynomial time, (c) every correct net should be obtainable from a sequent calculus proof, and (d) there should be a cut-elimination procedure which preserves correctness. Previous attempts to give proof-net-like objects for propositional classical logic have failed at least one of the above conditions. In [23], the author presented a calculus of proof nets (expansion nets) satisfying (a) and (b); the paper defined a sequent calculus corresponding to expansion nets but gave no explicit demonstration of (c). That sequent calculus, called LK\ast in this paper, is a novel one-sided sequent calculus with both additively and multiplicatively formulated disjunction rules. In this paper (a self-contained extended version of [23]), we give a full proof of (c) for expansion nets with respect to LK\ast, and in addition give a cut-elimination procedure internal to expansion nets - this makes expansion nets the first notion of proof-net for classical logic satisfying all four criteria.Comment: Accepted for publication in APAL (Special issue, Classical Logic and Computation

Parameterized Complexity of Edge Interdiction Problems

We study the parameterized complexity of interdiction problems in graphs. For an optimization problem on graphs, one can formulate an interdiction problem as a game consisting of two players, namely, an interdictor and an evader, who compete on an objective with opposing interests. In edge interdiction problems, every edge of the input graph has an interdiction cost associated with it and the interdictor interdicts the graph by modifying the edges in the graph, and the number of such modifications is constrained by the interdictor's budget. The evader then solves the given optimization problem on the modified graph. The action of the interdictor must impede the evader as much as possible. We focus on edge interdiction problems related to minimum spanning tree, maximum matching and shortest paths. These problems arise in different real world scenarios. We derive several fixed-parameter tractability and W[1]-hardness results for these interdiction problems with respect to various parameters. Next, we show close relation between interdiction problems and partial cover problems on bipartite graphs where the goal is not to cover all elements but to minimize/maximize the number of covered elements with specific number of sets. Hereby, we investigate the parameterized complexity of several partial cover problems on bipartite graphs

Satisfiability Games for Branching-Time Logics

The satisfiability problem for branching-time temporal logics like CTL*, CTL and CTL+ has important applications in program specification and verification. Their computational complexities are known: CTL* and CTL+ are complete for doubly exponential time, CTL is complete for single exponential time. Some decision procedures for these logics are known; they use tree automata, tableaux or axiom systems. In this paper we present a uniform game-theoretic framework for the satisfiability problem of these branching-time temporal logics. We define satisfiability games for the full branching-time temporal logic CTL* using a high-level definition of winning condition that captures the essence of well-foundedness of least fixpoint unfoldings. These winning conditions form formal languages of \omega-words. We analyse which kinds of deterministic {\omega}-automata are needed in which case in order to recognise these languages. We then obtain a reduction to the problem of solving parity or B\"uchi games. The worst-case complexity of the obtained algorithms matches the known lower bounds for these logics. This approach provides a uniform, yet complexity-theoretically optimal treatment of satisfiability for branching-time temporal logics. It separates the use of temporal logic machinery from the use of automata thus preserving a syntactical relationship between the input formula and the object that represents satisfiability, i.e. a winning strategy in a parity or B\"uchi game. The games presented here work on a Fischer-Ladner closure of the input formula only. Last but not least, the games presented here come with an attempt at providing tool support for the satisfiability problem of complex branching-time logics like CTL* and CTL+

An Approach to Select Cost-Effective Risk Countermeasures Exemplified in CORAS

Risk is unavoidable in business and risk management is needed amongst others to set up good security policies. Once the risks are evaluated, the next step is to decide how they should be treated. This involves managers making decisions on proper countermeasures to be implemented to mitigate the risks. The countermeasure expenditure, together with its ability to mitigate risks, is factors that affect the selection. While many approaches have been proposed to perform risk analysis, there has been less focus on delivering the prescriptive and specific information that managers require to select cost-effective countermeasures. This paper proposes a generic approach to integrate the cost assessment into risk analysis to aid such decision making. The approach makes use of a risk model which has been annotated with potential countermeasures, estimates for their cost and effect. A calculus is then employed to reason about this model in order to support decision in terms of decision diagrams. We exemplify the instantiation of the generic approach in the CORAS method for security risk analysis.Comment: 33 page

Multiplicative-Additive Proof Equivalence is Logspace-complete, via Binary Decision Trees

Given a logic presented in a sequent calculus, a natural question is that of equivalence of proofs: to determine whether two given proofs are equated by any denotational semantics, ie any categorical interpretation of the logic compatible with its cut-elimination procedure. This notion can usually be captured syntactically by a set of rule permutations. Very generally, proofnets can be defined as combinatorial objects which provide canonical representatives of equivalence classes of proofs. In particular, the existence of proof nets for a logic provides a solution to the equivalence problem of this logic. In certain fragments of linear logic, it is possible to give a notion of proofnet with good computational properties, making it a suitable representation of proofs for studying the cut-elimination procedure, among other things. It has recently been proved that there cannot be such a notion of proofnets for the multiplicative (with units) fragment of linear logic, due to the equivalence problem for this logic being Pspace-complete. We investigate the multiplicative-additive (without unit) fragment of linear logic and show it is closely related to binary decision trees: we build a representation of proofs based on binary decision trees, reducing proof equivalence to decision tree equivalence, and give a converse encoding of binary decision trees as proofs. We get as our main result that the complexity of the proof equivalence problem of the studied fragment is Logspace-complete.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1502.0199