Focused Linear Logic and the λ-calculus

International audienceLinear logic enjoys strong symmetries inherited from classical logic while providing a constructive framework comparable to intuitionistic logic. However, the computational interpretation of sequent calculus presentations of linear logic remains problematic, mostly because of the many rule permutations allowed in the sequent calculus. We address this problem by providing a simple interpretation of focused proofs, a complete subclass of linear sequent proofs known to have a much stronger structure than the standard sequent calculus for linear logic. Despite the classical setting, the interpretation relates proofs to a refined linear λ-calculus, and we investigate its properties and relation to other calculi, such as the usual λ-calculus, the λµ-calculus, and their variants based on sequent calculi

Dual-Context Calculi for Modal Logic

We present natural deduction systems and associated modal lambda calculi for the necessity fragments of the normal modal logics K, T, K4, GL and S4. These systems are in the dual-context style: they feature two distinct zones of assumptions, one of which can be thought as modal, and the other as intuitionistic. We show that these calculi have their roots in in sequent calculi. We then investigate their metatheory, equip them with a confluent and strongly normalizing notion of reduction, and show that they coincide with the usual Hilbert systems up to provability. Finally, we investigate a categorical semantics which interprets the modality as a product-preserving functor.Comment: Full version of article previously presented at LICS 2017 (see arXiv:1602.04860v4 or doi: 10.1109/LICS.2017.8005089

Call-by-name, Call-by-value, Call-by-need, and the Linear Lambda Calculus

Girard described two translations of intuitionistic logic into linear logic, one where A -> B maps to (!A) -o B, and another where it maps to !(A -o B). We detail the action of these translations on terms, and show that the first corresponds to a call-by-name calculus, while the second corresponds to call-by-value. We further show that if the target of the translation is taken to be an affine calculus, where ! controls contraction but weakening is allowed everywhere, then the second translation corresponds to a call-by-need calculus, as recently defined by Ariola, Felleisen, Maraist, Odersky, and Wadler. Thus the different calling mechanisms can be explained in terms of logical translations, bringing them into the scope of the Curry-Howard isomorphism

Metric Reasoning About λ-Terms: The Affine Case

International audienceTerms of Church's λ-calculus can be considered equivalent along many different definitions, but context equivalence is certainly the most direct and universally accepted one. If the underlying calculus becomes probabilistic, however, equivalence is too discriminating: terms which have totally unrelated behaviours are treated the same as terms which behave very similarly. We study the problem of evaluating the distance between affine λ-terms. A natural generalisation of context equivalence , is shown to be characterised by a notion of trace distance, and to be bounded from above by a coinductively defined distance based on the Kantorovich metric on distributions. A different, again fully-abstract, tuple-based notion of trace distance is shown to be able to handle nontrivial examples

A theory of effects and resources: adjunction models and polarised calculi

We consider the Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondence for effectful computation and resource management, specifically proposing polarised calculi together with presheaf-enriched adjunction models as the starting point for a comprehensive semantic theory relating logical systems, typed calculi, and categorical models in this context. Our thesis is that the combination of effects and resources should be considered orthogonally. Model theoretically, this leads to an understanding of our categorical models from two complementary perspectives: (i) as a linearisation of CBPV (Call-by-Push-Value) adjunction models, and (ii) as an extension of linear/non-linear adjunction models with an adjoint resolution of computational effects. When the linear structure is cartesian and the resource structure is trivial we recover Levy’s notion of CBPV adjunction model, while when the effect structure is trivial we have Benton’s linear/nonlinear adjunction models. Further instances of our model theory include the dialogue categories with a resource modality of Melliès and Tabareau, and the [E]EC ([Enriched] Effect Calculus) models of Egger, Møgelberg and Simpson. Our development substantiates the approach by providing a lifting theorem of linear models into cartesian ones. artesian ones. To each of our categorical models we systematically associate a typed term calculus, each of which corresponds to a variant of the sequent calculi LJ (Intuitionistic Logic) or ILL (Intuitionistic Linear Logic). The adjoint resolution of effects corresponds to polarisation whereby, syntactically, types locally determine a strict or lazy evaluation order and, semantically, the associativity of cuts is relaxed. In particular, our results show that polarisation provides a computational interpretation of CBPV in direct style. Further, we characterise depolarised models: those where the cut is associative, and where the evaluation order is unimportant. We explain possible advantages of this style of calculi for the operational semantics of effects.G. Munch-Maccagnoni was supported by ERC ECSYM; M. Fiore partially so.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the Association for Computing Machinery via http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2837614.283765