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

Call-by-name, call-by-value, call-by-need and the linear lambda calculus

this paper is a minor refinement of one previously presented by Wadler [41,42], which is based on Girard's successor to linear logic, the Logic of Unity [15]. A similar calculus has been devised by Plotkin and Barber [6]. In many presentations of logic a key role is played by the structural rules: contraction provides the only way to duplicate an assumption, while weakening provides the only way to discard one. In linear logic [14], the presence of contraction or weakening is revealed in a formula by the presence of the `of course' connective, written `!'. The Logic of Unity [15] takes this separation one step further by distinguishing linear assumptions, which one cannot contract or weaken, from nonlinear or intuitionistic assumptions, which one can. Corresponding to Girard's first translation we define a mapping ffi from the call-byname to the linear calculus and show that this mapping is sound, in that M \Gamma\Gamma\Gamma\Gamma

An Abstract Factorization Theorem for Explicit Substitutions

We study a simple form of standardization, here called factorization, for explicit substitutions calculi, i.e. lambda-calculi where beta-reduction is decomposed in various rules. These calculi, despite being non-terminating and non-orthogonal, have a key feature: each rule terminates when considered separately. It is well-known that the study of rewriting properties simplifies in presence of termination (e.g. confluence reduces to local confluence). This remark is exploited to develop an abstract theorem deducing factorization from some axioms on local diagrams. The axioms are simple and easy to check, in particular they do not mention residuals. The abstract theorem is then applied to some explicit substitution calculi related to Proof-Nets. We show how to recover standardization by levels, we model both call-by-name and call-by-value calculi and we characterize linear head reduction via a factorization theorem for a linear calculus of substitutions

Head reduction and normalization in a call-by-value lambda-calculus

Recently, a standardization theorem has been proven for a variant of Plotkin\u27s call-by-value lambda-calculus extended by means of two commutation rules (sigma-reductions): this result was based on a partitioning between head and internal reductions. We study the head normalization for this call-by-value calculus with sigma-reductions and we relate it to the weak evaluation of original Plotkin\u27s call-by-value lambda-calculus. We give also a (non-deterministic) normalization strategy for the call-by-value lambda-calculus with sigma-reductions

Collapsing non-idempotent intersection types

We proved recently that the extensional collapse of the relational model of linear logic coincides with its Scott model, whose objects are preorders and morphisms are downwards closed relations. This result is obtained by the construction of a new model whose objects can be understood as preorders equipped with a realizability predicate. We present this model, which features a new duality, and explain how to use it for reducing normalization results in idempotent intersection types (usually proved by reducibility) to purely combinatorial methods. We illustrate this approach in the case of the call-by-value lambda-calculus, for which we introduce a new resource calculus, but it can be applied in the same way to many different calculi

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

Standardization of a Call-By-Value Lambda-Calculus

We study an extension of Plotkin\u27s call-by-value lambda-calculus by means of two commutation rules (sigma-reductions). Recently, it has been proved that this extended calculus provides elegant characterizations of many semantic properties, as for example solvability. We prove a standardization theorem for this calculus by generalizing Takahashi\u27s approach of parallel reductions. The standardization property allows us to prove that our calculus is conservative with respect to the Plotkin\u27s one. In particular, we show that the notion of solvability for this calculus coincides with that for Plotkin\u27s call-by-value lambda-calculus

Factorization in Call-by-Name and Call-by-Value Calculi via Linear Logic

International audienceAbstract In each variant of the $$\lambda$$ λ -calculus, factorization and normalization are two key properties that show how results are computed. Instead of proving factorization/normalization for the call-by-name (CbN) and call-by-value (CbV) variants separately, we prove them only once, for the bang calculus (an extension of the $$\lambda$$ λ -calculus inspired by linear logic and subsuming CbN and CbV), and then we transfer the result via translations, obtaining factorization/normalization for CbN and CbV. The approach is robust: it still holds when extending the calculi with operators and extra rules to model some additional computational features