Infinitary λ\lambda-Calculi from a Linear Perspective (Long Version)

We introduce a linear infinitary $\lambda$-calculus, called $\ell\Lambda_{\infty}$, in which two exponential modalities are available, the first one being the usual, finitary one, the other being the only construct interpreted coinductively. The obtained calculus embeds the infinitary applicative $\lambda$-calculus and is universal for computations over infinite strings. What is particularly interesting about $\ell\Lambda_{\infty}$, is that the refinement induced by linear logic allows to restrict both modalities so as to get calculi which are terminating inductively and productive coinductively. We exemplify this idea by analysing a fragment of $\ell\Lambda$ built around the principles of $\mathsf{SLL}$ and $\mathsf{4LL}$. Interestingly, it enjoys confluence, contrarily to what happens in ordinary infinitary $\lambda$-calculi

The Geometry of Synchronization (Long Version)

We graft synchronization onto Girard's Geometry of Interaction in its most concrete form, namely token machines. This is realized by introducing proof-nets for SMLL, an extension of multiplicative linear logic with a specific construct modeling synchronization points, and of a multi-token abstract machine model for it. Interestingly, the correctness criterion ensures the absence of deadlocks along reduction and in the underlying machine, this way linking logical and operational properties.Comment: 26 page

Simulation in the Call-by-Need Lambda-Calculus with Letrec, Case, Constructors, and Seq

This paper shows equivalence of several versions of applicative similarity and contextual approximation, and hence also of applicative bisimilarity and contextual equivalence, in LR, the deterministic call-by-need lambda calculus with letrec extended by data constructors, case-expressions and Haskell's seq-operator. LR models an untyped version of the core language of Haskell. The use of bisimilarities simplifies equivalence proofs in calculi and opens a way for more convenient correctness proofs for program transformations. The proof is by a fully abstract and surjective transfer into a call-by-name calculus, which is an extension of Abramsky's lazy lambda calculus. In the latter calculus equivalence of our similarities and contextual approximation can be shown by Howe's method. Similarity is transferred back to LR on the basis of an inductively defined similarity. The translation from the call-by-need letrec calculus into the extended call-by-name lambda calculus is the composition of two translations. The first translation replaces the call-by-need strategy by a call-by-name strategy and its correctness is shown by exploiting infinite trees which emerge by unfolding the letrec expressions. The second translation encodes letrec-expressions by using multi-fixpoint combinators and its correctness is shown syntactically by comparing reductions of both calculi. A further result of this paper is an isomorphism between the mentioned calculi, which is also an identity on letrec-free expressions.Comment: 50 pages, 11 figure

Lambda Calculus with Explicit Recursion

AbstractThis paper is concerned with the study ofλ-calculus with explicit recursion, namely of cyclicλ-graphs. The starting point is to treat aλ-graph as a system of recursion equations involvingλ-terms and to manipulate such systems in an unrestricted manner, using equational logic, just as is possible for first-order term rewriting. Surprisingly, now the confluence property breaks down in an essential way. Confluence can be restored by introducing a restraining mechanism on the substitution operation. This leads to a family ofλ-graph calculi, which can be seen as an extension of the family ofλσ-calculi (λ-calculi with explicit substitution). While theλσ-calculi treat the let-construct as a first-class citizen, our calculi support the letrec, a feature that is essential to reason about time and space behavior of functional languages and also about compilation and optimizations of program

Expressibility in the Lambda Calculus with Letrec

We investigate the relationship between finite terms in lambda-letrec, the lambda calculus with letrec, and the infinite lambda terms they express. As there are easy examples of lambda-terms that, intuitively, are not unfoldings of terms in lambda-letrec, we consider the question: How can those infinite lambda terms be characterised that are lamda-letrec-expressible in the sense that they can be obtained as infinite unfoldings of terms in lambda-letrec? For 'observing' infinite lambda-terms through repeated 'experiments' carried out at the head of the term we introduce two rewrite systems (with rewrite relations) -reg-> and -reg+-> that decompose the term, and produce 'generated subterms' in two notions. Thereby the sort of the step can be observed as well as its target, a generated subterm. In both systems there are four sorts of decomposition steps: -lambda-> steps (decomposing a lambda-abstraction), -@0> and -@1> steps (decomposing an application into its function and argument), and respectively, -del-> steps (delimiting the scope of an abstraction, for -reg->), and -S-> (delimiting of scopes, for -reg+->). These steps take place on infinite lambda-terms furnished with a leading prefix of abstractions for gathering previously encountered lambda-abstractions and keeping the generated subterms closed. We call an infinite lambda-term 'regular'/'strongly regular' if its set of -reg-> -reachable / -reg-> -reachable generated subterms is finite. Furthermore, we analyse the binding structure of lambda-terms with the concept of 'binding-capturing chain'. Using these concepts, we answer the question above by providing two characterisations of lambda-letrec-expressibility. For all infinite lambda-terms M, the following statements are equivalent: (i) M is lambda-letrec-expressible; (ii) M is strongly regular; (iii) M is regular, and it only has finite binding-capturing chains.Comment: 79 pages, 25 figure