Modules over monads and operational semantics

This paper is a contribution to the search for efficient and high-level mathematical tools to specify and reason about (abstract) programming languages or calculi. Generalising the reduction monads of Ahrens et al., we introduce transition monads, thus covering new applications such as lambda-bar-mu-calculus, pi-calculus, Positive GSOS specifications, differential lambda-calculus, and the big-step, simply-typed, call-by-value lambda-calculus. Moreover, we design a suitable notion of signature for transition monads

High-level signatures and initial semantics

We present a device for specifying and reasoning about syntax for datatypes, programming languages, and logic calculi. More precisely, we study a notion of signature for specifying syntactic constructions. In the spirit of Initial Semantics, we define the syntax generated by a signature to be the initial object---if it exists---in a suitable category of models. In our framework, the existence of an associated syntax to a signature is not automatically guaranteed. We identify, via the notion of presentation of a signature, a large class of signatures that do generate a syntax. Our (presentable) signatures subsume classical algebraic signatures (i.e., signatures for languages with variable binding, such as the pure lambda calculus) and extend them to include several other significant examples of syntactic constructions. One key feature of our notions of signature, syntax, and presentation is that they are highly compositional, in the sense that complex examples can be obtained by assembling simpler ones. Moreover, through the Initial Semantics approach, our framework provides, beyond the desired algebra of terms, a well-behaved substitution and the induction and recursion principles associated to the syntax. This paper builds upon ideas from a previous attempt by Hirschowitz-Maggesi, which, in turn, was directly inspired by some earlier work of Ghani-Uustalu-Hamana and Matthes-Uustalu. The main results presented in the paper are computer-checked within the UniMath system.Comment: v2: extended version of the article as published in CSL 2018 (http://dx.doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CSL.2018.4); list of changes given in Section 1.5 of the paper; v3: small corrections throughout the paper, no major change

Contraction-free proofs and finitary games for Linear Logic

In the standard sequent presentations of Girard's Linear Logic (LL), there are two "non-decreasing" rules, where the premises are not smaller than the conclusion, namely the cut and the contraction rules. It is a universal concern to eliminate the cut rule. We show that, using an admissible modification of the tensor rule, contractions can be eliminated, and that cuts can be simultaneously limited to a single initial occurrence. This view leads to a consistent, but incomplete game model for LL with exponentials, which is finitary, in the sense that each play is finite. The game is based on a set of inference rules which does not enjoy cut elimination. Nevertheless, the cut rule is valid in the model.Comment: 19 pages, uses tikz and Paul Taylor's diagram

Initial Semantics for Strengthened Signatures

We give a new general definition of arity, yielding the companion notions of signature and associated syntax. This setting is modular in the sense requested by Ghani and Uustalu: merging two extensions of syntax corresponds to building an amalgamated sum. These signatures are too general in the sense that we are not able to prove the existence of an associated syntax in this general context. So we have to select arities and signatures for which there exists the desired initial monad. For this, we follow a track opened by Matthes and Uustalu: we introduce a notion of strengthened arity and prove that the corresponding signatures have initial semantics (i.e. associated syntax). Our strengthened arities admit colimits, which allows the treatment of the \lambda-calculus with explicit substitution.Comment: In Proceedings FICS 2012, arXiv:1202.317

Innocent strategies as presheaves and interactive equivalences for CCS

Seeking a general framework for reasoning about and comparing programming languages, we derive a new view of Milner's CCS. We construct a category E of plays, and a subcategory V of views. We argue that presheaves on V adequately represent innocent strategies, in the sense of game semantics. We then equip innocent strategies with a simple notion of interaction. This results in an interpretation of CCS. Based on this, we propose a notion of interactive equivalence for innocent strategies, which is close in spirit to Beffara's interpretation of testing equivalences in concurrency theory. In this framework we prove that the analogues of fair and must testing equivalences coincide, while they differ in the standard setting.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2011, arXiv:1108.014