The relational model is injective for Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic (without weakenings)

We show that for Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic (without weakenings) the syntactical equivalence relation on proofs induced by cut-elimination coincides with the semantic equivalence relation on proofs induced by the multiset based relational model: one says that the interpretation in the model (or the semantics) is injective. We actually prove a stronger result: two cut-free proofs of the full multiplicative and exponential fragment of linear logic whose interpretations coincide in the multiset based relational model are the same "up to the connections between the doors of exponential boxes".Comment: 36 page

The relational model is injective for Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic

We prove a completeness result for Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic (MELL): we show that the relational model is injective for MELL proof-nets, i.e. the equality between MELL proof-nets in the relational model is exactly axiomatized by cut-elimination.Comment: 33 page

Taylor expansion in linear logic is invertible

Each Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic (MELL) proof-net can be expanded into a differential net, which is its Taylor expansion. We prove that two different MELL proof-nets have two different Taylor expansions. As a corollary, we prove a completeness result for MELL: We show that the relational model is injective for MELL proof-nets, i.e. the equality between MELL proof-nets in the relational model is exactly axiomatized by cut-elimination

Relational type-checking for MELL proof-structures. Part 1: Multiplicatives

Relational semantics for linear logic is a form of non-idempotent intersection type system, from which several informations on the execution of a proof-structure can be recovered. An element of the relational interpretation of a proof-structure R with conclusion $\Gamma$ acts thus as a type (refining $\Gamma$) having R as an inhabitant. We are interested in the following type-checking question: given a proof-structure R, a list of formulae $\Gamma$, and a point x in the relational interpretation of $\Gamma$, is x in the interpretation of R? This question is decidable. We present here an algorithm that decides it in time linear in the size of R, if R is a proof-structure in the multiplicative fragment of linear logic. This algorithm can be extended to larger fragments of multiplicative-exponential linear logic containing $\lambda$-calculus

An Abstract Approach to Stratification in Linear Logic

We study the notion of stratification, as used in subsystems of linear logic with low complexity bounds on the cut-elimination procedure (the so-called light logics), from an abstract point of view, introducing a logical system in which stratification is handled by a separate modality. This modality, which is a generalization of the paragraph modality of Girard's light linear logic, arises from a general categorical construction applicable to all models of linear logic. We thus learn that stratification may be formulated independently of exponential modalities; when it is forced to be connected to exponential modalities, it yields interesting complexity properties. In particular, from our analysis stem three alternative reformulations of Baillot and Mazza's linear logic by levels: one geometric, one interactive, and one semantic

A semantic account of strong normalization in Linear Logic

We prove that given two cut free nets of linear logic, by means of their relational interpretations one can: 1) first determine whether or not the net obtained by cutting the two nets is strongly normalizable 2) then (in case it is strongly normalizable) compute the maximal length of the reduction sequences starting from that net.Comment: 41 page

Injectivity of relational semantics for (connected) MELL proof-nets via Taylor expansion

International audienceWe show that: (1) the Taylor expansion of a cut-free MELL proof-structure R with atomic axioms is the (most informative part of the) relational semantics of R; (2) every (connected) MELL proof-net is uniquely determined by the element of order 2 of its Taylor expansion; (3) the relational semantics is injective for (connected) MELL proof-nets

A semantic measure of the execution time in linear logic

AbstractWe give a semantic account of the execution time (i.e. the number of cut elimination steps leading to the normal form) of an untyped MELL net. We first prove that: (1) a net is head-normalizable (i.e. normalizable at depth 0) if and only if its interpretation in the multiset based relational semantics is not empty and (2) a net is normalizable if and only if its exhaustive interpretation (a suitable restriction of its interpretation) is not empty. We then give a semantic measure of execution time: we prove that we can compute the number of cut elimination steps leading to a cut free normal form of the net obtained by connecting two cut free nets by means of a cut-link, from the interpretations of the two cut free nets. These results are inspired by similar ones obtained by the first author for the untyped lambda-calculus

Weak Typed Boehm Theorem on IMLL

In the Boehm theorem workshop on Crete island, Zoran Petric called Statman's ``Typical Ambiguity theorem'' typed Boehm theorem. Moreover, he gave a new proof of the theorem based on set-theoretical models of the simply typed lambda calculus. In this paper, we study the linear version of the typed Boehm theorem on a fragment of Intuitionistic Linear Logic. We show that in the multiplicative fragment of intuitionistic linear logic without the multiplicative unit 1 (for short IMLL) weak typed Boehm theorem holds. The system IMLL exactly corresponds to the linear lambda calculus without exponentials, additives and logical constants. The system IMLL also exactly corresponds to the free symmetric monoidal closed category without the unit object. As far as we know, our separation result is the first one with regard to these systems in a purely syntactical manner.Comment: a few minor correction

Normalizing the Taylor expansion of non-deterministic {\lambda}-terms, via parallel reduction of resource vectors

It has been known since Ehrhard and Regnier's seminal work on the Taylor expansion of $\lambda$-terms that this operation commutes with normalization: the expansion of a $\lambda$-term is always normalizable and its normal form is the expansion of the B\"ohm tree of the term. We generalize this result to the non-uniform setting of the algebraic $\lambda$-calculus, i.e. $\lambda$-calculus extended with linear combinations of terms. This requires us to tackle two difficulties: foremost is the fact that Ehrhard and Regnier's techniques rely heavily on the uniform, deterministic nature of the ordinary $\lambda$-calculus, and thus cannot be adapted; second is the absence of any satisfactory generic extension of the notion of B\"ohm tree in presence of quantitative non-determinism, which is reflected by the fact that the Taylor expansion of an algebraic $\lambda$-term is not always normalizable. Our solution is to provide a fine grained study of the dynamics of $\beta$-reduction under Taylor expansion, by introducing a notion of reduction on resource vectors, i.e. infinite linear combinations of resource $\lambda$-terms. The latter form the multilinear fragment of the differential $\lambda$-calculus, and resource vectors are the target of the Taylor expansion of $\lambda$-terms. We show the reduction of resource vectors contains the image of any $\beta$-reduction step, from which we deduce that Taylor expansion and normalization commute on the nose. We moreover identify a class of algebraic $\lambda$-terms, encompassing both normalizable algebraic $\lambda$-terms and arbitrary ordinary $\lambda$-terms: the expansion of these is always normalizable, which guides the definition of a generalization of B\"ohm trees to this setting