An Intensional Concurrent Faithful Encoding of Turing Machines

The benchmark for computation is typically given as Turing computability; the ability for a computation to be performed by a Turing Machine. Many languages exploit (indirect) encodings of Turing Machines to demonstrate their ability to support arbitrary computation. However, these encodings are usually by simulating the entire Turing Machine within the language, or by encoding a language that does an encoding or simulation itself. This second category is typical for process calculi that show an encoding of lambda-calculus (often with restrictions) that in turn simulates a Turing Machine. Such approaches lead to indirect encodings of Turing Machines that are complex, unclear, and only weakly equivalent after computation. This paper presents an approach to encoding Turing Machines into intensional process calculi that is faithful, reduction preserving, and structurally equivalent. The encoding is demonstrated in a simple asymmetric concurrent pattern calculus before generalised to simplify infinite terms, and to show encodings into Concurrent Pattern Calculus and Psi Calculi.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2014, arXiv:1410.701

On the Expressiveness of Intensional Communication

The expressiveness of communication primitives has been explored in a common framework based on the pi-calculus by considering four features: synchronism (asynchronous vs synchronous), arity (monadic vs polyadic data), communication medium (shared dataspaces vs channel-based), and pattern-matching (binding to a name vs testing name equality). Here pattern-matching is generalised to account for terms with internal structure such as in recent calculi like Spi calculi, Concurrent Pattern Calculus and Psi calculi. This paper explores intensionality upon terms, in particular communication primitives that can match upon both names and structures. By means of possibility/impossibility of encodings, this paper shows that intensionality alone can encode synchronism, arity, communication-medium, and pattern-matching, yet no combination of these without intensionality can encode any intensional language.Comment: In Proceedings EXPRESS/SOS 2014, arXiv:1408.127

On the Expressiveness of Joining

The expressiveness of communication primitives has been explored in a common framework based on the pi-calculus by considering four features: synchronism (asynchronous vs synchronous), arity (monadic vs polyadic data), communication medium (shared dataspaces vs channel-based), and pattern-matching (binding to a name vs testing name equality vs intensionality). Here another dimension coordination is considered that accounts for the number of processes required for an interaction to occur. Coordination generalises binary languages such as pi-calculus to joining languages that combine inputs such as the Join Calculus and general rendezvous calculus. By means of possibility/impossibility of encodings, this paper shows coordination is unrelated to the other features. That is, joining languages are more expressive than binary languages, and no combination of the other features can encode a joining language into a binary language. Further, joining is not able to encode any of the other features unless they could be encoded otherwise.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2015, arXiv:1508.04595. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1408.145

Algorithms and the mathematical foundations of computer science

The goal of this chapter is to bring to the attention of philosophers of mathematics the concept of algorithm as it is studied incontemporary theoretical computer science, and at the same time address several foundational questions about the role this notion plays in our practices. A view known as algorithmic realism will be described which maintains that individual algorithms are identical to mathematical objects. Upon considering several ways in which the details of algorithmic realism might be formulated, it will be argued (pace Moschovakis and Gurevich) that there are principled reasons to think that this view cannot be systematically developed in a manner which is compatible with the practice of computational complexity theory and algorithmic analysis

On the Semantics of Intensionality and Intensional Recursion

Intensionality is a phenomenon that occurs in logic and computation. In the most general sense, a function is intensional if it operates at a level finer than (extensional) equality. This is a familiar setting for computer scientists, who often study different programs or processes that are interchangeable, i.e. extensionally equal, even though they are not implemented in the same way, so intensionally distinct. Concomitant with intensionality is the phenomenon of intensional recursion, which refers to the ability of a program to have access to its own code. In computability theory, intensional recursion is enabled by Kleene's Second Recursion Theorem. This thesis is concerned with the crafting of a logical toolkit through which these phenomena can be studied. Our main contribution is a framework in which mathematical and computational constructions can be considered either extensionally, i.e. as abstract values, or intensionally, i.e. as fine-grained descriptions of their construction. Once this is achieved, it may be used to analyse intensional recursion.Comment: DPhil thesis, Department of Computer Science & St John's College, University of Oxfor

Computability in constructive type theory

We give a formalised and machine-checked account of computability theory in the Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC), the constructive type theory underlying the Coq proof assistant. We first develop synthetic computability theory, pioneered by Richman, Bridges, and Bauer, where one treats all functions as computable, eliminating the need for a model of computation. We assume a novel parametric axiom for synthetic computability and give proofs of results like Rice’s theorem, the Myhill isomorphism theorem, and the existence of Post’s simple and hypersimple predicates relying on no other axioms such as Markov’s principle or choice axioms. As a second step, we introduce models of computation. We give a concise overview of definitions of various standard models and contribute machine-checked simulation proofs, posing a non-trivial engineering effort. We identify a notion of synthetic undecidability relative to a fixed halting problem, allowing axiom-free machine-checked proofs of undecidability. We contribute such undecidability proofs for the historical foundational problems of computability theory which require the identification of invariants left out in the literature and now form the basis of the Coq Library of Undecidability Proofs. We then identify the weak call-by-value λ-calculus L as sweet spot for programming in a model of computation. We introduce a certifying extraction framework and analyse an axiom stating that every function of type ℕ → ℕ is L-computable.Wir behandeln eine formalisierte und maschinengeprüfte Betrachtung von Berechenbarkeitstheorie im Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC), der konstruktiven Typtheorie die dem Beweisassistenten Coq zugrunde liegt. Wir entwickeln erst synthetische Berechenbarkeitstheorie, vorbereitet durch die Arbeit von Richman, Bridges und Bauer, wobei alle Funktionen als berechenbar behandelt werden, ohne Notwendigkeit eines Berechnungsmodells. Wir nehmen ein neues, parametrisches Axiom für synthetische Berechenbarkeit an und beweisen Resultate wie das Theorem von Rice, das Isomorphismus Theorem von Myhill und die Existenz von Post’s simplen und hypersimplen Prädikaten ohne Annahme von anderen Axiomen wie Markov’s Prinzip oder Auswahlaxiomen. Als zweiten Schritt führen wir Berechnungsmodelle ein. Wir geben einen kompakten Überblick über die Definition von verschiedenen Berechnungsmodellen und erklären maschinengeprüfte Simulationsbeweise zwischen diesen Modellen, welche einen hohen Konstruktionsaufwand beinhalten. Wir identifizieren einen Begriff von synthetischer Unentscheidbarkeit relativ zu einem fixierten Halteproblem welcher axiomenfreie maschinengeprüfte Unentscheidbarkeitsbeweise erlaubt. Wir erklären solche Beweise für die historisch grundlegenden Probleme der Berechenbarkeitstheorie, die das Identifizieren von Invarianten die normalerweise in der Literatur ausgelassen werden benötigen und nun die Basis der Coq Library of Undecidability Proofs bilden. Wir identifizieren dann den call-by-value λ-Kalkül L als sweet spot für die Programmierung in einem Berechnungsmodell. Wir führen ein zertifizierendes Extraktionsframework ein und analysieren ein Axiom welches postuliert dass jede Funktion vom Typ N→N L-berechenbar ist

Diagrammatic Algebra: from Linear to Concurrent Systems

We introduce the resource calculus, a string diagrammatic language for concurrent systems. Significantly, it uses the same syntax and operational semantics as the signal flow calculus — an algebraic formalism for signal flow graphs, which is a combinatorial model of computation of interest in control theory. Indeed, our approach stems from the simple but fruitful observation that, by replacing real numbers (modelling signals) with natural numbers (modelling resources) in the operational semantics, concurrent behaviour patterns emerge. The resource calculus is canonical: we equip it and its stateful extension with equational theories that characterise the underlying space of definable behaviours—a convex algebraic universe of additive relations— via isomorphisms of categories. Finally, we demonstrate that our calculus is sufficiently expressive to capture behaviour definable by classical Petri net

In Search of Effectful Dependent Types

Real world programming languages crucially depend on the availability of computational effects to achieve programming convenience and expressive power as well as program efficiency. Logical frameworks rely on predicates, or dependent types, to express detailed logical properties about entities. According to the Curry-Howard correspondence, programming languages and logical frameworks should be very closely related. However, a language that has both good support for real programming and serious proving is still missing from the programming languages zoo. We believe this is due to a fundamental lack of understanding of how dependent types should interact with computational effects. In this thesis, we make a contribution towards such an understanding, with a focus on semantic methods.Comment: PhD thesis, Version submitted to Exam School