Context Semantics, Linear Logic and Computational Complexity

We show that context semantics can be fruitfully applied to the quantitative analysis of proof normalization in linear logic. In particular, context semantics lets us define the weight of a proof-net as a measure of its inherent complexity: it is both an upper bound to normalization time (modulo a polynomial overhead, independently on the reduction strategy) and a lower bound to the number of steps to normal form (for certain reduction strategies). Weights are then exploited in proving strong soundness theorems for various subsystems of linear logic, namely elementary linear logic, soft linear logic and light linear logic.Comment: 22 page

Normalization in Supernatural deduction and in Deduction modulo

Deduction modulo and Supernatural deduction are two extentions of predicate logic with computation rules. Whereas the application of computation rules in deduction modulo is transparent, these rules are used to build non-logical deduction rules in Supernatural deduction. In both cases, adding computation rules may jeopardize proof normalization, but various conditions have been given in both cases, so that normalization is preserved. We prove in this paper that normalization in Supernatural deduction and in Deduction modulo are equivalent, i.e. the set of computation rules for which one system strongly normalizes is the same as the set of computation rules for which the other is

On completeness of reducibility candidates as a semantics of strong normalization

This paper defines a sound and complete semantic criterion, based on reducibility candidates, for strong normalization of theories expressed in minimal deduction modulo \`a la Curry. The use of Curry-style proof-terms allows to build this criterion on the classic notion of pre-Heyting algebras and makes that criterion concern all theories expressed in minimal deduction modulo. Compared to using Church-style proof-terms, this method provides both a simpler definition of the criterion and a simpler proof of its completeness.Comment: 24 page

A simple proof that super consistency implies cut elimination

International audienceWe give a simple and direct proof that super-consistency implies the cut elimination property in deduction modulo. This proof can be seen as a simpli cation of the proof that super-consistency implies proof normalization. It also takes ideas from the semantic proofs of cut elimination that proceed by proving the completeness of the cut-free calculus. As an application, we compare our work with the cut elimination theorems in higher-order logic that involve V-complexes

A Simple Proof That Super-Consistency Implies Cut Elimination

We give a simple and direct proof that super-consistency implies the cut elimination property in deduction modulo. This proof can be seen as a simplification of the proof that super-consistency implies proof normalization. It also takes ideas from the semantic proofs of cut elimination that proceed by proving the completeness of the cut-free calculus. As an application, we compare our work with the cut elimination theorems in higher-order logic that involve V-complexes

Definitions by Rewriting in the Calculus of Constructions

The main novelty of this paper is to consider an extension of the Calculus of Constructions where predicates can be defined with a general form of rewrite rules. We prove the strong normalization of the reduction relation generated by the beta-rule and the user-defined rules under some general syntactic conditions including confluence. As examples, we show that two important systems satisfy these conditions: a sub-system of the Calculus of Inductive Constructions which is the basis of the proof assistant Coq, and the Natural Deduction Modulo a large class of equational theories.Comment: Best student paper (Kleene Award

Cut elimination for Zermelo set theory

We show how to express intuitionistic Zermelo set theory in deduction modulo (i.e. by replacing its axioms by rewrite rules) in such a way that the corresponding notion of proof enjoys the normalization property. To do so, we first rephrase set theory as a theory of pointed graphs (following a paradigm due to P. Aczel) by interpreting set-theoretic equality as bisimilarity, and show that in this setting, Zermelo's axioms can be decomposed into graph-theoretic primitives that can be turned into rewrite rules. We then show that the theory we obtain in deduction modulo is a conservative extension of (a minor extension of) Zermelo set theory. Finally, we prove the normalization of the intuitionistic fragment of the theory

The Stratified Foundations as a theory modulo

The Stratified Foundations are a restriction of naive set theory where the comprehension scheme is restricted to stratifiable propositions. It is known that this theory is consistent and that proofs strongly normalize in this theory. Deduction modulo is a formulation of first-order logic with a general notion of cut. It is known that proofs normalize in a theory modulo if it has some kind of many-valued model called a pre-model. We show in this paper that the Stratified Foundations can be presented in deduction modulo and that the method used in the original normalization proof can be adapted to construct a pre-model for this theory

Semantic A-translation and Super-consistency entail Classical Cut Elimination

We show that if a theory R defined by a rewrite system is super-consistent, the classical sequent calculus modulo R enjoys the cut elimination property, which was an open question. For such theories it was already known that proofs strongly normalize in natural deduction modulo R, and that cut elimination holds in the intuitionistic sequent calculus modulo R. We first define a syntactic and a semantic version of Friedman's A-translation, showing that it preserves the structure of pseudo-Heyting algebra, our semantic framework. Then we relate the interpretation of a theory in the A-translated algebra and its A-translation in the original algebra. This allows to show the stability of the super-consistency criterion and the cut elimination theorem

Conservativity of embeddings in the lambda Pi calculus modulo rewriting (long version)

The lambda Pi calculus can be extended with rewrite rules to embed any functional pure type system. In this paper, we show that the embedding is conservative by proving a relative form of normalization, thus justifying the use of the lambda Pi calculus modulo rewriting as a logical framework for logics based on pure type systems. This result was previously only proved under the condition that the target system is normalizing. Our approach does not depend on this condition and therefore also works when the source system is not normalizing.Comment: Long version of TLCA 2015 pape