Maximal Sharing in the Lambda Calculus with letrec

Increasing sharing in programs is desirable to compactify the code, and to avoid duplication of reduction work at run-time, thereby speeding up execution. We show how a maximal degree of sharing can be obtained for programs expressed as terms in the lambda calculus with letrec. We introduce a notion of `maximal compactness' for lambda-letrec-terms among all terms with the same infinite unfolding. Instead of defined purely syntactically, this notion is based on a graph semantics. lambda-letrec-terms are interpreted as first-order term graphs so that unfolding equivalence between terms is preserved and reflected through bisimilarity of the term graph interpretations. Compactness of the term graphs can then be compared via functional bisimulation. We describe practical and efficient methods for the following two problems: transforming a lambda-letrec-term into a maximally compact form; and deciding whether two lambda-letrec-terms are unfolding-equivalent. The transformation of a lambda-letrec-term $L$ into maximally compact form $L_0$ proceeds in three steps: (i) translate L into its term graph $G = [[ L ]]$; (ii) compute the maximally shared form of $G$ as its bisimulation collapse $G_0$; (iii) read back a lambda-letrec-term $L_0$ from the term graph $G_0$ with the property $[[ L_0 ]] = G_0$. This guarantees that $L_0$ and $L$ have the same unfolding, and that $L_0$ exhibits maximal sharing. The procedure for deciding whether two given lambda-letrec-terms $L_1$ and $L_2$ are unfolding-equivalent computes their term graph interpretations $[[ L_1 ]]$ and $[[ L_2 ]]$, and checks whether these term graphs are bisimilar. For illustration, we also provide a readily usable implementation.Comment: 18 pages, plus 19 pages appendi

Comparing and evaluating extended Lambek calculi

Lambeks Syntactic Calculus, commonly referred to as the Lambek calculus, was innovative in many ways, notably as a precursor of linear logic. But it also showed that we could treat our grammatical framework as a logic (as opposed to a logical theory). However, though it was successful in giving at least a basic treatment of many linguistic phenomena, it was also clear that a slightly more expressive logical calculus was needed for many other cases. Therefore, many extensions and variants of the Lambek calculus have been proposed, since the eighties and up until the present day. As a result, there is now a large class of calculi, each with its own empirical successes and theoretical results, but also each with its own logical primitives. This raises the question: how do we compare and evaluate these different logical formalisms? To answer this question, I present two unifying frameworks for these extended Lambek calculi. Both are proof net calculi with graph contraction criteria. The first calculus is a very general system: you specify the structure of your sequents and it gives you the connectives and contractions which correspond to it. The calculus can be extended with structural rules, which translate directly into graph rewrite rules. The second calculus is first-order (multiplicative intuitionistic) linear logic, which turns out to have several other, independently proposed extensions of the Lambek calculus as fragments. I will illustrate the use of each calculus in building bridges between analyses proposed in different frameworks, in highlighting differences and in helping to identify problems.Comment: Empirical advances in categorial grammars, Aug 2015, Barcelona, Spain. 201

Simulation in the call-by-need lambda-calculus with letrec

This paper shows the equivalence of applicative similarity and contextual approximation, and hence also of bisimilarity and contextual equivalence, in the deterministic call-by-need lambda calculus with letrec. Bisimilarity simplifies equivalence proofs in the calculus and opens a way for more convenient correctness proofs for program transformations. Although this property may be a natural one to expect, to the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first one providing a proof. The proof technique is to transfer the contextual approximation into Abramsky's lazy lambda calculus by a fully abstract and surjective translation. This also shows that the natural embedding of Abramsky's lazy lambda calculus into the call-by-need lambda calculus with letrec is an isomorphism between the respective term-models.We show that the equivalence property proven in this paper transfers to a call-by-need letrec calculus developed by Ariola and Felleisen

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

Models of sharing graphs: a categorical semantics of let and letrec

To my parents A general abstract theory for computation involving shared resources is presented. We develop the models of sharing graphs, also known as term graphs, in terms of both syntax and semantics. According to the complexity of the permitted form of sharing, we consider four situations of sharing graphs. The simplest is first-order acyclic sharing graphs represented by let-syntax, and others are extensions with higher-order constructs (lambda calculi) and/or cyclic sharing (recursive letrec binding). For each of four settings, we provide the equational theory for representing the sharing graphs, and identify the class of categorical models which are shown to be sound and complete for the theory. The emphasis is put on the algebraic nature of sharing graphs, which leads us to the semantic account of them. We describe the models in terms of the notions of symmetric monoidal categories and functors, additionally with symmetric monoidal adjunctions and trace

Optimal Sharing Graphs for Substructural Higher-order Rewriting Systems

The notion of optimal reduction was introduced by Lévy (1980) in the context of the untyped ?-calculus, based on the concept of families of reducible expressions. It took more than a decade for an algorithm achieving this optimal reduction to be discovered, introduced by Lamping (1990) and then refined by Gonthier, Abadi & Lévy (1992). The existence of an analogous algorithm for higher-order term rewriting systems was later theorised by Van Oostrom (1996), but has of yet been unrealised. We provide such an algorithm by defining a class of higher-order rewriting systems having Intuitionistic Linear Logic (Benton, Bierman, de Paiva & Hyland 1992) as a substitution calculus, in the sense of Van Oostrom (1994), and introduce a method of translating terms and rules into equivalent Lamping-Gonthier sharing graphs. Our system thus offers a generalisation of the mechanism for optimal reduction from second- to higher-order term rewriting systems. Moreover, in the case of match-sequential systems, we provide a specific reduction strategy, as we are able to effectively identify needed redexes. Finally, we explore briefly the subtleties and complexities of applying the technique to various other term rewriting system, such as those with alternative substructural or polymorphic type systems, those with generalised patterns on the left-hand side, and those with rationally infinite terms. All these systems are built upon the same fundamental translation of ?-terms to sharing graphs