We define a Public Announcement Separation Logic (PASL) that allows us to consider epistemic possible worlds as resources that can be shared or separated, in the spirit of separation logics. After studying its semantics and illustrating its interest for modelling systems, we provide a sound and complete tableau calculus that deals with resource, agent and announcement constraints and give also a countermodel extraction method.

In this paper, we are interested in high-level programming languages to implement the core components of an interactive theorem prover for a dependently typed language: the kernel – responsible for type-checking closed terms – and the elaborator – that manipulates open terms, that is terms containing unresolved unification variables.

In this paper, we confirm that λProlog, the language developed by Miller and Nadathur since the 80s, is extremely suitable for implementing the kernel. Indeed, we easily obtain a type checker for the Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC). Even more, we do so in an incremental way by escalating a checker for a pure type system to the full CIC.

We then turn our attention to the elaborator with the objective to obtain a simple implementation thanks to the features of the programming language. In particular, we want to use λProlog’s unification variables to model the object language ones. In this way, scope checking, carrying of assignments and occur checking are handled by the programming language.

We observe that the eager generative semantics inherited from Prolog clashes with this plan. We propose an extension to λProlog that allows to control the generative semantics, suspend goals over flexible terms turning them into constraints, and finally manipulate these constraints at the meta-meta level via constraint handling rules.

We implement the proposed language extension in the Embedded Lambda Prolog Interpreter system and we discuss how it can be used to extend the kernel into an elaborator for CIC.

We propose and study a probabilistic logic over an algebraic basis, including equations and domain restrictions. The logic combines aspects from classical logic and equational logic with an exogenous approach to quantitative probabilistic reasoning. We present a sound and weakly complete axiomatization for the logic, parameterized by an equational specification of the algebraic basis coupled with the intended domain restrictions.We show that the satisfiability problem for the logic is decidable, under the assumption that its algebraic basis is given by means of a convergent rewriting system, and, additionally, that the axiomatization of domain restrictions enjoys a suitable subterm property. For this purpose, we provide a polynomial reduction to Satisfiability Modulo Theories. As a consequence, we get that validity in the logic is also decidable. Furthermore, under the assumption that the rewriting system that defines the equational basis underlying the logic is also subterm convergent, we show that the resulting satisfiability problem is NP-complete, and thus the validity problem is coNP-complete.We test the logic with meaningful examples in information security, namely by verifying and estimating the probability of the existence of offline guessing attacks to cryptographic protocols.

This paper deals with runtime enforcement of untimed and timed properties with uncontrollable events. Runtime enforcement consists in defining and using mechanisms that modify the executions of a running system to ensure their correctness with respect to a desired property. We introduce a framework that takes as input any regular (timed) property described by a deterministic automaton over an alphabet of events, with some of these events being uncontrollable. An uncontrollable event cannot be delayed nor intercepted by an enforcement mechanism. Enforcement mechanisms should satisfy important properties, namely soundness, compliance and optimality – meaning that enforcement mechanisms should output as soon as possible correct executions that are as close as possible to the input execution. We define the conditions for a property to be enforceable with uncontrollable events. Moreover, we synthesise sound, compliant and optimal descriptions of runtime enforcement mechanisms at two levels of abstraction to facilitate their design and implementation.

HyLL (Hybrid Linear Logic) is an extension of intuitionistic linear logic (ILL) that has been used as a framework for specifying systems that exhibit certain modalities. In HyLL, truth judgements are labelled by worlds (having a monoidal structure) and hybrid connectives (at and ↓) relate worlds with formulas. We start this work by showing that HyLL's axioms and rules can be adequately encoded in linear logic (LL), so that one focused step in LL will correspond to a step of derivation in HyLL. This shows that any proof in HyLL can be exactly mimicked by a LL focused derivation. Another extension of LL that has extensively been used for specifying systems with modalities is Subexponential Linear Logic (SELL). In SELL, the LL exponentials (!, ?) are decorated with labels representing locations, and a pre-order on such labels defines the provability relation. We propose an encoding of HyLL into SELL⋒ (SELL plus quantification over locations) that gives better insights about the meaning of worlds in HyLL. More precisely, we identify worlds as locations, and show that a flat subexponential structure is sufficient for representing any world structure in HyLL. This shows that HyLL's monoidal structure is not reflected in LL derivations, hence not increasing the expressiveness of LL, from a proof theoretical point of view. We conclude by proposing the notion of fixed points in multiplicative additive HyLL (μHyMALL), which can be encoded into multiplicative additive linear logic with fixed points (μMALL). As an application, we propose encodings of Computational Tree Logic (CTL) into both μMALL and μHyMALL. In the former, states are represented as atoms in the linear context, hence reflecting a more operational view of CTL connectives. In the latter, worlds represent states of the transition system, thus exhibiting a pleasant similarity with the semantics of CTL.

This article presents a unified logic that combines classical logic, intuitionistic logic and affine linear logic (restricting contraction but not weakening). We show that this unification can be achieved semantically, syntactically and in the computational interpretation of proofs. It extends our previous work in combining classical and intuitionistic logics. Compared to linear logic, classical fragments of proofs are better isolated from non-classical fragments. We define a phase semantics for this logic that naturally extends the Kripke semantics of intuitionistic logic. We present a sequent calculus with novel structural rules, which entail a more elaborate procedure for cut elimination. Computationally, this system allows affine-linear interpretations of proofs to be combined with classical interpretations, such as the λμ calculus. We show how cut elimination must respect the boundaries between classical and non-classical modes of proof that correspond to delimited control effects.

Ramsey quantifiers are a natural object of study not only for logic and computer science but also for the formal semantics of natural language. Restricting attention to finite models leads to the natural question whether all Ramsey quantifiers are either polynomial-time computable or NP-hard, and whether we can give a natural characterization of the polynomial-time computable quantifiers. In this paper, we first show that there exist intermediate Ramsey quantifiers and then we prove a dichotomy result for a large and natural class of Ramsey quantifiers, based on a reasonable and widely believed complexity assumption. We show that the polynomial-time computable quantifiers in this class are exactly the constant-log-bounded Ramsey quantifiers.

Several fixed-point models share the equational properties of iteration theories, or iteration categories, which are cartesian categories equipped with a fixed point or dagger operation subject to certain axioms. After discussing some of the basic models, we provide equational bases for iteration categories and offer an analysis of the axioms. Although iteration categories have no finite base for their identities, there exist finitely based implicational theories that capture their equational theory. We exhibit several such systems. Then we enrich iteration categories with an additive structure and exhibit interesting cases where the interaction between the iteration category structure and the additive structure can be captured by a finite number of identities. This includes the iteration category of monotonic or continuous functions over complete lattices equipped with the least fixed-point operation and the binary supremum operation as addition, the categories of simulation, bisimulation, or language equivalence classes of processes, context-free languages, and others. Finally, we exhibit a finite equational system involving residuals, which is sound and complete for monotonic or continuous functions over complete lattices in the sense that it proves all of their identities involving the operations and constants of cartesian categories, the least fixed-point operation and binary supremum, but not involving residuals.

Linear logical frameworks with subexponentials have been used for the specification of, among other systems, proof systems, concurrent programming languages and linear authorisation logics. In these frameworks, subexponentials can be configured to allow or not for the application of the contraction and weakening rules while the exchange rule can always be applied. This means that formulae in such frameworks can only be organised as sets and multisets of formulae not being possible to organise formulae as lists of formulae. This paper investigates the proof theory of linear logic proof systems in the non-commutative variant. These systems can disallow the application of exchange rule on some subexponentials. We investigate conditions for when cut elimination is admissible in the presence of non-commutative subexponentials, investigating the interaction of the exchange rule with the local and non-local contraction rules. We also obtain some new undecidability and decidability results on non-commutative linear logic with subexponentials.

We give a semantics for a classical variant of Dale Miller and Alwen Tiu’s logic FOλ∇. Our semantics validates the rule that nabla x implies exists x, but is otherwise faithful to the authors’ original intentions. The semantics is based on a category of so-called nabla sets, which are simply strictly increasing sequences of non-empty sets. We show that the logic is sound for that semantics. Assuming there is a unique base type ι, we show that it is complete for Henkin structures, incomplete for standard structures in general, but complete for standard structures in the case of Π1 formulae, and that includes all first-order formulae.

This paper clarifies that linear implication defines a branching-time preorder, preserved in all contexts, when used to compare embeddings of process in non-commutative logic. The logic considered is a first-order extension of the proof system BV featuring a de Morgan dual pair of nominal quantifiers, called BV1. An embedding of π-calculus processes as formulae in BV1 is defined, and the soundness of linear implication in BV1 with respect to a notion of weak simulation in the π -calculus is established. A novel contribution of this work is that we generalise the notion of a ‘left proof’ to a class of formulae sufficiently large to compare embeddings of processes, from which simulating execution steps are extracted. We illustrate the expressive power of BV1 by demonstrating that results extend to the internal π -calculus, where privacy of inputs is guaranteed. We also remark that linear implication is strictly finer than any interleaving preorder.

Bisimulation proofs play a central role in programming languages in establishing rich properties such as contextual equivalence. They are also challenging to mechanize, since they require a combination of inductive and coinductive reasoning on open terms. In this paper, we describe mechanizing the property that similarity in the call-by-name lambda calculus is a pre-congruence using Howe’s method in the Beluga formal reasoning system. The development relies on three key ingredients: (1) we give a higher order abstract syntax (HOAS) encoding of lambda terms together with their operational semantics as intrinsically typed terms, thereby avoiding not only the need to deal with binders, renaming and substitutions, but keeping all typing invariants implicit; (2) we take advantage of Beluga’s support for representing open terms using built-in contexts and simultaneous substitutions: this allows us to directly state central definitions such as open simulation without resorting to the usual inductive closure operation and to encode very elegantly notoriously painful proofs such as the substitutivity of the Howe relation; (3) we exploit the possibility of reasoning by coinduction in Beluga’s reasoning logic. The end result is succinct and elegant, thanks to the high-level abstractions and primitives Beluga provides. We believe that this mechanization is a significant example that illustrates Beluga’s strength at mechanizing challenging (co)inductive proofs using HOAS encodings.

One of the main issues in proof certification is that different theorem provers, even when designed for the same logic, tend to use different proof formalisms and produce outputs in different formats. The project ProofCert promotes the usage of a common specification language and of a small and trusted kernel in order to check proofs coming from different sources and for different logics. By relying on that idea and by using a classical focused sequent calculus as a kernel, we propose here a general framework for checking modal proofs. We present the implementation of the framework in a Prolog-like language and show how it is possible to specialize it in a simple and modular way in order to cover different proof formalisms, such as labelled systems, tableaux, sequent calculi and nested sequent calculi. We illustrate the method for the logic K by providing several examples and discuss how to further extend the approach.