Linear Logic and Strong Normalization

Strong normalization for linear logic requires elaborated rewriting techniques. In this paper we give a new presentation of MELL proof nets, without any commutative cut-elimination rule. We show how this feature induces a compact and simple proof of strong normalization, via reducibility candidates. It is the first proof of strong normalization for MELL which does not rely on any form of confluence, and so it smoothly scales up to full linear logic. Moreover, it is an axiomatic proof, as more generally it holds for every set of rewriting rules satisfying three very natural requirements with respect to substitution, commutation with promotion, full composition, and Kesner\u27s IE property. The insight indeed comes from the theory of explicit substitutions, and from looking at the exponentials as a substitution device

On the Relative Usefulness of Fireballs

In CSL-LICS 2014, Accattoli and Dal Lago showed that there is an implementation of the ordinary (i.e. strong, pure, call-by-name) $\lambda$-calculus into models like RAM machines which is polynomial in the number of $\beta$-steps, answering a long-standing question. The key ingredient was the use of a calculus with useful sharing, a new notion whose complexity was shown to be polynomial, but whose implementation was not explored. This paper, meant to be complementary, studies useful sharing in a call-by-value scenario and from a practical point of view. We introduce the Fireball Calculus, a natural extension of call-by-value to open terms for which the problem is as hard as for the ordinary lambda-calculus. We present three results. First, we adapt the solution of Accattoli and Dal Lago, improving the meta-theory of useful sharing. Then, we refine the picture by introducing the GLAMoUr, a simple abstract machine implementing the Fireball Calculus extended with useful sharing. Its key feature is that usefulness of a step is tested---surprisingly---in constant time. Third, we provide a further optimization that leads to an implementation having only a linear overhead with respect to the number of $\beta$-steps.Comment: Technical report for the LICS 2015 submission with the same titl

Proof nets and the call-by-value λ-calculus

International audienceThis paper gives a detailed account of the relationship between (a variant of) the call-by-value lambda calculus and linear logic proof nets. The presentation is carefully tuned in order to realize an isomorphism between the two systems: every single rewriting step on the calculus maps to a single step on proof nets, and viceversa. In this way, we obtain an algebraic reformulation of proof nets. Moreover, we provide a simple correctness criterion for our proof nets, which employ boxes in an unusual way, and identify a subcalculus that is shown to be as expressive as the full calculus

Proof pearl: abella formalization of lambda-calculus cube property

International audienceIn 1994 Gerard Huet formalized in Coq the cube property of lambda-calculus residuals. His development is based on a clever idea, a beautiful inductive definition of residuals. However, in his formalization there is a lot of noise concerning the representation of terms with binders. We re-interpret his work in Abella, a recent proof assistant based on higher-order abstract syntax and provided with a nominal quantifier. By revisiting Huet's approach and exploiting the features of Abella, we get a strikingly compact and natural development, which makes Huet's idea really shine

An Abstract Factorization Theorem for Explicit Substitutions

We study a simple form of standardization, here called factorization, for explicit substitutions calculi, i.e. lambda-calculi where beta-reduction is decomposed in various rules. These calculi, despite being non-terminating and non-orthogonal, have a key feature: each rule terminates when considered separately. It is well-known that the study of rewriting properties simplifies in presence of termination (e.g. confluence reduces to local confluence). This remark is exploited to develop an abstract theorem deducing factorization from some axioms on local diagrams. The axioms are simple and easy to check, in particular they do not mention residuals. The abstract theorem is then applied to some explicit substitution calculi related to Proof-Nets. We show how to recover standardization by levels, we model both call-by-name and call-by-value calculi and we characterize linear head reduction via a factorization theorem for a linear calculus of substitutions

(Leftmost-Outermost) Beta Reduction is Invariant, Indeed

Slot and van Emde Boas' weak invariance thesis states that reasonable machines can simulate each other within a polynomially overhead in time. Is lambda-calculus a reasonable machine? Is there a way to measure the computational complexity of a lambda-term? This paper presents the first complete positive answer to this long-standing problem. Moreover, our answer is completely machine-independent and based over a standard notion in the theory of lambda-calculus: the length of a leftmost-outermost derivation to normal form is an invariant cost model. Such a theorem cannot be proved by directly relating lambda-calculus with Turing machines or random access machines, because of the size explosion problem: there are terms that in a linear number of steps produce an exponentially long output. The first step towards the solution is to shift to a notion of evaluation for which the length and the size of the output are linearly related. This is done by adopting the linear substitution calculus (LSC), a calculus of explicit substitutions modeled after linear logic proof nets and admitting a decomposition of leftmost-outermost derivations with the desired property. Thus, the LSC is invariant with respect to, say, random access machines. The second step is to show that LSC is invariant with respect to the lambda-calculus. The size explosion problem seems to imply that this is not possible: having the same notions of normal form, evaluation in the LSC is exponentially longer than in the lambda-calculus. We solve such an impasse by introducing a new form of shared normal form and shared reduction, deemed useful. Useful evaluation avoids those steps that only unshare the output without contributing to beta-redexes, i.e. the steps that cause the blow-up in size. The main technical contribution of the paper is indeed the definition of useful reductions and the thorough analysis of their properties.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1405.331

Distilling Abstract Machines (Long Version)

It is well-known that many environment-based abstract machines can be seen as strategies in lambda calculi with explicit substitutions (ES). Recently, graphical syntaxes and linear logic led to the linear substitution calculus (LSC), a new approach to ES that is halfway between big-step calculi and traditional calculi with ES. This paper studies the relationship between the LSC and environment-based abstract machines. While traditional calculi with ES simulate abstract machines, the LSC rather distills them: some transitions are simulated while others vanish, as they map to a notion of structural congruence. The distillation process unveils that abstract machines in fact implement weak linear head reduction, a notion of evaluation having a central role in the theory of linear logic. We show that such a pattern applies uniformly in call-by-name, call-by-value, and call-by-need, catching many machines in the literature. We start by distilling the KAM, the CEK, and the ZINC, and then provide simplified versions of the SECD, the lazy KAM, and Sestoft's machine. Along the way we also introduce some new machines with global environments. Moreover, we show that distillation preserves the time complexity of the executions, i.e. the LSC is a complexity-preserving abstraction of abstract machines.Comment: 63 page