Internal Calculi for Separation Logics

We present a general approach to axiomatise separation logics with heaplet semantics with no external features such as nominals/labels. To start with, we design the first (internal) Hilbert-style axiomatisation for the quantifier-free separation logic SL(?, -*). We instantiate the method by introducing a new separation logic with essential features: it is equipped with the separating conjunction, the predicate ls, and a natural guarded form of first-order quantification. We apply our approach for its axiomatisation. As a by-product of our method, we also establish the exact expressive power of this new logic and we show PSpace-completeness of its satisfiability problem

Proof-theoretic Semantics for Intuitionistic Multiplicative Linear Logic

This work is the first exploration of proof-theoretic semantics for a substructural logic. It focuses on the base-extension semantics (B-eS) for intuitionistic multiplicative linear logic (IMLL). The starting point is a review of Sandqvist’s B-eS for intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL), for which we propose an alternative treatment of conjunction that takes the form of the generalized elimination rule for the connective. The resulting semantics is shown to be sound and complete. This motivates our main contribution, a B-eS for IMLL , in which the definitions of the logical constants all take the form of their elimination rule and for which soundness and completeness are established

Bunched logics: a uniform approach

Bunched logics have found themselves to be key tools in modern computer science, in particular through the industrial-level program verification formalism Separation Logic. Despite this—and in contrast to adjacent families of logics like modal and substructural logic—there is a lack of uniform methodology in their study, leaving many evident variants uninvestigated and many open problems unresolved. In this thesis we investigate the family of bunched logics—including previously unexplored intuitionistic variants—through two uniform frameworks. The first is a system of duality theorems that relate the algebraic and Kripke-style interpretations of the logics; the second, a modular framework of tableaux calculi that are sound and complete for both the core logics themselves, as well as many classes of bunched logic model important for applications in program verification and systems modelling. In doing so we are able to resolve a number of open problems in the literature, including soundness and completeness theorems for intuitionistic variants of bunched logics, classes of Separation Logic models and layered graph models; decidability of layered graph logics; a characterisation theorem for the classes of bunched logic model definable by bunched logic formulae; and the failure of Craig interpolation for principal bunched logics. We also extend our duality theorems to the categorical structures suitable for interpreting predicate versions of the logics, in particular hyperdoctrinal structures used frequently in Separation Logic

Proof-theoretic Semantics and Tactical Proof

The use of logical systems for problem-solving may be as diverse as in proving theorems in mathematics or in figuring out how to meet up with a friend. In either case, the problem solving activity is captured by the search for an \emph{argument}, broadly conceived as a certificate for a solution to the problem. Crucially, for such a certificate to be a solution, it has be \emph{valid}, and what makes it valid is that they are well-constructed according to a notion of inference for the underlying logical system. We provide a general framework uniformly describing the use of logic as a mathematics of reasoning in the above sense. We use proof-theoretic validity in the Dummett-Prawitz tradition to define validity of arguments, and use the theory of tactical proof to relate arguments, inference, and search.Comment: submitte

A Complete Axiomatisation for Quantifier-Free Separation Logic

We present the first complete axiomatisation for quantifier-free separation logic. The logic is equipped with the standard concrete heaplet semantics and the proof system has no external feature such as nominals/labels. It is not possible to rely completely on proof systems for Boolean BI as the concrete semantics needs to be taken into account. Therefore, we present the first internal Hilbert-style axiomatisation for quantifier-free separation logic. The calculus is divided in three parts: the axiomatisation of core formulae where Boolean combinations of core formulae capture the expressivity of the whole logic, axioms and inference rules to simulate a bottom-up elimination of separating connectives, and finally structural axioms and inference rules from propositional calculus and Boolean BI with the magic wand

Defining Logical Systems via Algebraic Constraints on Proofs

We comprehensively present a program of decomposition of proof systems for non-classical logics into proof systems for other logics, especially classical logic, using an algebra of constraints. That is, one recovers a proof system for a target logic by enriching a proof system for another, typically simpler, logic with an algebra of constraints that act as correctness conditions on the latter to capture the former; for example, one may use Boolean algebra to give constraints in a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic to produce a sequent calculus for intuitionistic propositional logic. The idea behind such forms of reduction is to obtain a tool for uniform and modular treatment of proof theory and provide a bridge between semantics logics and their proof theory. The article discusses the theoretical background of the project and provides several illustrations of its work in the field of intuitionistic and modal logics. The results include the following: a uniform treatment of modular and cut-free proof systems for a large class of propositional logics; a general criterion for a novel approach to soundness and completeness of a logic with respect to a model-theoretic semantics; and a case study deriving a model-theoretic semantics from a proof-theoretic specification of a logic.Comment: submitte