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

Globular: an online proof assistant for higher-dimensional rewriting

This article introduces Globular, an online proof assistant for the formalization and verification of proofs in higher-dimensional category theory. The tool produces graphical visualizations of higher-dimensional proofs, assists in their construction with a point-and- click interface, and performs type checking to prevent incorrect rewrites. Hosted on the web, it has a low barrier to use, and allows hyperlinking of formalized proofs directly from research papers. It allows the formalization of proofs from logic, topology and algebra which are not formalizable by other methods, and we give several examples

Experience Implementing a Performant Category-Theory Library in Coq

We describe our experience implementing a broad category-theory library in Coq. Category theory and computational performance are not usually mentioned in the same breath, but we have needed substantial engineering effort to teach Coq to cope with large categorical constructions without slowing proof script processing unacceptably. In this paper, we share the lessons we have learned about how to represent very abstract mathematical objects and arguments in Coq and how future proof assistants might be designed to better support such reasoning. One particular encoding trick to which we draw attention allows category-theoretic arguments involving duality to be internalized in Coq's logic with definitional equality. Ours may be the largest Coq development to date that uses the relatively new Coq version developed by homotopy type theorists, and we reflect on which new features were especially helpful.Comment: The final publication will be available at link.springer.com. This version includes a full bibliography which does not fit in the Springer version; other than the more complete references, this is the version submitted as a final copy to ITP 201