Term Graph Representations for Cyclic Lambda-Terms

We study various representations for cyclic lambda-terms as higher-order or as first-order term graphs. We focus on the relation between `lambda-higher-order term graphs' (lambda-ho-term-graphs), which are first-order term graphs endowed with a well-behaved scope function, and their representations as `lambda-term-graphs', which are plain first-order term graphs with scope-delimiter vertices that meet certain scoping requirements. Specifically we tackle the question: Which class of first-order term graphs admits a faithful embedding of lambda-ho-term-graphs in the sense that: (i) the homomorphism-based sharing-order on lambda-ho-term-graphs is preserved and reflected, and (ii) the image of the embedding corresponds closely to a natural class (of lambda-term-graphs) that is closed under homomorphism? We systematically examine whether a number of classes of lambda-term-graphs have this property, and we find a particular class of lambda-term-graphs that satisfies this criterion. Term graphs of this class are built from application, abstraction, variable, and scope-delimiter vertices, and have the characteristic feature that the latter two kinds of vertices have back-links to the corresponding abstraction. This result puts a handle on the concept of subterm sharing for higher-order term graphs, both theoretically and algorithmically: We obtain an easily implementable method for obtaining the maximally shared form of lambda-ho-term-graphs. Also, we open up the possibility to pull back properties from first-order term graphs to lambda-ho-term-graphs. In fact we prove this for the property of the sharing-order successors of a given term graph to be a complete lattice with respect to the sharing order. This report extends the paper with the same title (http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.6338v1) in the proceedings of the workshop TERMGRAPH 2013.Comment: 35 pages. report extending proceedings article on arXiv:1302.6338 (changes with respect to version v2: added section 8, modified Proposition 2.4, added Remark 2.5, added Corollary 7.11, modified figures in the conclusion

Reflections on a Geometry of Processes

Contains fulltext : 32919.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Algebraic Process Calcul

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

A Computational Interpretation of Context-Free Expressions

We phrase parsing with context-free expressions as a type inhabitation problem where values are parse trees and types are context-free expressions. We first show how containment among context-free and regular expressions can be reduced to a reachability problem by using a canonical representation of states. The proofs-as-programs principle yields a computational interpretation of the reachability problem in terms of a coercion that transforms the parse tree for a context-free expression into a parse tree for a regular expression. It also yields a partial coercion from regular parse trees to context-free ones. The partial coercion from the trivial language of all words to a context-free expression corresponds to a predictive parser for the expression

Some remarks on definability of process graphs

Item does not contain fulltex

Regularity-Preserving but not Reflecting Encodings

Encodings, that is, injective functions from words to words, have been studied extensively in several settings. In computability theory the notion of encoding is crucial for defining computability on arbitrary domains, as well as for comparing the power of models of computation. In language theory much attention has been devoted to regularity preserving functions. A natural question arising in these contexts is: Is there a bijective encoding such that its image function preserves regularity of languages, but its pre-image function does not? Our main result answers this question in the affirmative: For every countable class C of languages there exists a bijective encoding f such that for every language L ∊ C its image f[L] is regular. Our construction of such encodings has several noteworthy consequences. Firstly, anomalies arise when models of computation are compared with respect to a known concept of implementation that is based on encodings which are not required to be computable: Every countable decision model can be implemented, in this sense, by finite-state automata, even via bijective encodings. Hence deterministic finite-state automata would be equally powerful as Turing machine deciders. A second consequence concerns the recognizability of sets of natural numbers via number representations and finite automata. A set of numbers is said to be recognizable with respect to a representation if an automaton accepts the language of representations. Our result entails that there is one number representation with respect to which every recursive set is recognizable