Property-based testing (PBT) is a technique for validating code against an executable specification by automatically generating test-data. We present a proof-theoretical reconstruction of this style of testing for relational specifications and employ the Foundational Proof Certificate framework to describe test generators. We do this by encoding certain kinds of “proof outlines” as proof certificates that can describe various common generation strategies in the PBT literature, ranging from random to exhaustive, including their combination. We also address the shrinking of counterexamples as a first step toward their explanation. Once generation is accomplished, the testing phase is a standard logic programing search. After illustrating our techniques on simple, first-order (algebraic) data structures, we lift it to data structures containing bindings by using the $\lambda$-tree syntax approach to encode bindings. The $\lambda$Prolog programing language can perform both generating and checking of tests using this approach to syntax. We then further extend PBT to specifications in a fragment of linear logic.

We present a linearity theorem for a proof language of intuitionistic multiplicative additive linear logic, incorporating addition and scalar multiplication. The proofs in this language are linear in the algebraic sense. This work is part of a broader research program aiming to define a logic with a proof language that forms a quantum programming language.

The categorical models of differential linear logic (LL) are additive categories and those of the differential lambda-calculus are left-additive categories because of the Leibniz rule which requires the summation of two expressions. This means that, as far as the differential lambda-calculus and differential LL are concerned, these models feature finite nondeterminism and indeed these languages are essentially non-deterministic. We introduce a categorical framework for differentiation which does not require additivity and is compatible with deterministic models such as coherence spaces and probabilistic models such as probabilistic coherence spaces.

One of the most fundamental properties of a proof system is analyticity, expressing the fact that a proof of a given formula F only uses subformulas of F. In sequent calculus, this property is usually proved by showing that the $\mathsf{cut}$ rule is admissible, i.e., the introduction of the auxiliary lemma H in the reasoning “if H follows from G and F follows from H, then F follows from G” can be eliminated. The proof of cut admissibility is usually a tedious, error-prone process through several proof transformations, thus requiring the assistance of (semi-)automatic procedures. In a previous work by Miller and Pimentel, linear logic ( $\mathsf{LL}$ ) was used as a logical framework for establishing sufficient conditions for cut admissibility of object logical systems (OL). The OL’s inference rules are specified as an $\mathsf{LL}$ theory and an easy-to-verify criterion sufficed to establish the cut-admissibility theorem for the OL at hand. However, there are many logical systems that cannot be adequately encoded in $\mathsf{LL}$ , the most symptomatic cases being sequent systems for modal logics. In this paper, we use a linear-nested sequent ( $\mathsf{LNS}$ ) presentation of $\mathsf{MMLL}$ (a variant of LL with subexponentials), and show that it is possible to establish a cut-admissibility criterion for $\mathsf{LNS}$ systems for (classical or substructural) multimodal logics. We show that the same approach is suitable for handling the $\mathsf{LNS}$ system for intuitionistic logic.

We show that numerous distinctive concepts of constructive mathematics arise automatically from an “antithesis” translation of affine logic into intuitionistic logic via a Chu/Dialectica construction. This includes apartness relations, complemented subsets, anti-subgroups and anti-ideals, strict and non-strict order pairs, cut-valued metrics, and apartness spaces. We also explain the constructive bifurcation of some classical concepts using the choice between multiplicative and additive affine connectives. Affine logic and the antithesis construction thus systematically “constructivize” classical definitions, handling the resulting bookkeeping automatically.

This paper is meant to be a survey about implicit characterizations of complexity classes by fragments of higher-order programming languages, with a special focus on type systems and subsystems of linear logic. Particular emphasis will be put on Martin Hofmann’s contributions to the subject, which very much helped in shaping the field.

Ehrhard et al. (2018. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, POPL 2, Article 59.) proposed a model of probabilistic functional programming in a category of normed positive cones and stable measurable cone maps, which can be seen as a coordinate-free generalization of probabilistic coherence spaces (PCSs). However, unlike the case of PCSs, it remained unclear if the model could be refined to a model of classical linear logic. In this work, we consider a somewhat similar category which gives indeed a coordinate-free model of full propositional linear logic with nondegenerate interpretation of additives and sound interpretation of exponentials. Objects are dual pairs of normed cones satisfying certain specific completeness properties, such as existence of norm-bounded monotone weak limits, and morphisms are bounded (adjointable) positive maps. Norms allow us a distinct interpretation of dual additive connectives as product and coproduct. Exponential connectives are modeled using real analytic functions and distributions that have representations as power series with positive coefficients. Unlike the familiar case of PCSs, there is no reference or need for a preferred basis; in this sense the model is invariant. PCSs form a full subcategory, whose objects, seen as posets, are lattices. Thus, we get a model fitting in the tradition of interpreting linear logic in a linear algebraic setting, which arguably is free from the drawbacks of its predecessors.

Linear logic (LL) has been used as a foundation (and inspiration) for the development of programming languages, logical frameworks, and models for concurrency. LL’s cut-elimination and the completeness of focusing are two of its fundamental properties that have been exploited in such applications. This paper formalizes the proof of cut-elimination for focused LL. For that, we propose a set of five cut-rules that allows us to prove cut-elimination directly on the focused system. We also encode the inference rules of other logics as LL theories and formalize the necessary conditions for those logics to have cut-elimination. We then obtain, for free, cut-elimination for first-order classical, intuitionistic, and variants of LL. We also use the LL metatheory to formalize the relative completeness of natural deduction and sequent calculus in first-order minimal logic. Hence, we propose a framework that can be used to formalize fundamental properties of logical systems specified as LL theories.

Doctrines are categorical structures very apt to study logics of different nature within a unified environment: the 2-category Dtn of doctrines. Modal interior operators are characterised as particular adjoints in the 2-category Dtn. We show that they can be constructed from comonads in Dtn as well as from adjunctions in it, and we compare the two constructions. Finally we show the amount of information lost in the passage from a comonad, or from an adjunction, to the modal interior operator. The basis for the present work is provided by some seminal work of John Power.

We prove that the category of vector bundles over a fixed smooth manifold and its corresponding category of convenient modules are models for intuitionistic differential linear logic. The exponential modality is modelled by composing the jet comonad, whose Kleisli category has linear differential operators as morphisms, with the more familiar distributional comonad, whose Kleisli category has smooth maps as morphisms. Combining the two comonads gives a new interpretation of the semantics of differential linear logic where the Kleisli morphisms are smooth local functionals, or equivalently, smooth partial differential operators, and the codereliction map induces the functional derivative. This points towards a logic, and hence a computational theory of non-linear partial differential equations and their solutions based on variational calculus.

We characterize Weihrauch reducibility in $ \operatorname {\mathrm {E-PA^{\omega }}} + \operatorname {\mathrm {QF-AC^{0,0}}}$ and all systems containing it by the provability in a linear variant of the same calculus using modifications of Gödel’s Dialectica interpretation that incorporate ideas from linear logic, nonstandard arithmetic, higher-order computability, and phase semantics.

We prove that the semantics of intuitionistic linear logic in vector spaces which uses cofree coalgebras is also a model of differential linear logic, and that the Cartesian closed category of cofree coalgebras is a model of the simply typed differential λ-calculus.

The Sweedler semantics of intuitionistic differential linear logic takes values in the category of vector spaces, using the cofree cocommutative coalgebra to interpret the exponential and primitive elements to interpret the differential structure. In this paper, we explicitly compute the denotations under this semantics of an interesting class of proofs in linear logic, introduced by Girard: the encodings of step functions of Turing machines. Along the way we prove some useful technical results about linear independence of denotations of Church numerals and binary integers.

This paper surveys a new perspective on tree automata and Monadic second-order logic (MSO) on infinite trees. We show that the operations on tree automata used in the translations of MSO-formulae to automata underlying Rabin’s Tree Theorem (the decidability of MSO) correspond to the connectives of Intuitionistic Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic (IMELL). Namely, we equip a variant of usual alternating tree automata (that we call uniform tree automata) with a fibered monoidal-closed structure which in particular handles a linear complementation of alternating automata. Moreover, this monoidal structure is actually Cartesian on non-deterministic automata, and an adaptation of a usual construction for the simulation of alternating automata by non-deterministic ones satisfies the deduction rules of the !(–) exponential modality of IMELL. (But this operation is unfortunately not a functor because it does not preserve composition.) Our model of IMLL consists in categories of games which are based on usual categories of two-player linear sequential games called simple games, and which generalize usual acceptance games of tree automata. This model provides a realizability semantics, along the lines of Curry–Howard proofs-as-programs correspondence, of a linear constructive deduction system for tree automata. This realizability semantics, which can be summarized with the slogan “automata as objects, strategies as morphisms,” satisfies an expected property of witness extraction from proofs of existential statements. Moreover, it makes it possible to combine realizers produced as interpretations of proofs with strategies witnessing (non-)emptiness of tree automata.

In this paper, we propose and explore a new approach to abstract machines and optimal reduction via streams, infinite sequences of elements. We first define a sequential abstract machine capable of performing directed virtual reduction (DVR) and then we extend it to its parallel version, whose equivalence is explained through the properties of DVR itself. The result is a formal definition of the λ-calculus interpreter called Parallel Environment for Lambda Calculus Reduction (PELCR), a software for λ-calculus reduction based on the Geometry of Interaction. In particular, we describe PELCR as a stream-processing abstract machine, which in principle can also be applied to infinite streams.

This paper presents a simple and intuitive syntax for proof nets of the multiplicative cyclic fragment (McyLL) of linear logic (LL). The main technical achievement of this work is to propose a correctness criterion that allows for sequentialization (recovering a proof from a proof net) for all McyLL proof nets, including those containing cut links. This is achieved by adapting the idea of contractibility (originally introduced by Danos to give a quadratic time procedure for proof nets correctness) to cyclic LL. This paper also gives a characterization of McyLL proof nets for Lambek Calculus and thus a geometrical (i.e., non-inductive) way to parse phrases or sentences by means of Lambek proof nets.

A recent trend in object-oriented programming languages is the use of access permissions (APs) as an abstraction for controlling concurrent executions of programs. The use of AP source code annotations defines a protocol specifying how object references can access the mutable state of objects. Although the use of APs simplifies the task of writing concurrent code, an unsystematic use of them can lead to subtle problems. This paper presents a declarative interpretation of APs as linear concurrent constraint programs (lcc). We represent APs as constraints (i.e., formulas in logic) in an underlying constraint system whose entailment relation models the transformation rules of APs. Moreover, we use processes in lcc to model the dependencies imposed by APs, thus allowing the faithful representation of their flow in the program. We verify relevant properties about AP programs by taking advantage of the interpretation of lcc processes as formulas in Girard's intuitionistic linear logic (ILL). Properties include deadlock detection, program correctness (whether programs adhere to their AP specifications or not), and the ability of methods to run concurrently. By relying on a focusing discipline for ILL, we provide a complexity measure for proofs of the above-mentioned properties. The effectiveness of our verification techniques is demonstrated by implementing the Alcove tool that includes an animator and a verifier. The former executes the lcc model, observing the flow of APs, and quickly finding inconsistencies of the APs vis-à-vis the implementation. The latter is an automatic theorem prover based on ILL.

We have designed a new logic programming language called LM (Linear Meld) for programming graph-based algorithms in a declarative fashion. Our language is based on linear logic, an expressive logical system where logical facts can be consumed. Because LM integrates both classical and linear logic, LM tends to be more expressive than other logic programming languages. LM programs are naturally concurrent because facts are partitioned by nodes of a graph data structure. Computation is performed at the node level while communication happens between connected nodes. In this paper, we present the syntax and operational semantics of our language and illustrate its use through a number of examples.

Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP) is a simple and powerful model for concurrency where agents interact by telling and asking constraints. Since their inception, CCP-languages have been designed for having a strong connection to logic. In fact, the underlying constraint system can be built from a suitable fragment of intuitionistic (linear) logic -ILL- and processes can be interpreted as formulas in ILL. Constraints as ILL formulas fail to represent accurately situations where “preferences” (called soft constraints) such as probabilities, uncertainty or fuzziness are present. In order to circumvent this problem, c-semirings have been proposed as algebraic structures for defining constraint systems where agents are allowed to tell and ask soft constraints. Nevertheless, in this case, the tight connection to logic and proof theory is lost. In this work, we give a proof theoretical meaning to soft constraints: they can be defined as formulas in a suitable fragment of ILL with subexponentials (SELL) where subexponentials, ordered in a c-semiring structure, are interpreted as preferences. We hence achieve two goals: (1) obtain a CCP language where agents can tell and ask soft constraints and (2) prove that the language in (1) has a strong connection with logic. Hence we keep a declarative reading of processes as formulas while providing a logical framework for soft-CCP based systems. An interesting side effect of (1) is that one is also able to handle probabilities (and other modalities) in SELL, by restricting the use of the promotion rule for non-idempotent c-semirings.This finer way of controlling subexponentials allows for considering more interesting spaces and restrictions, and it opens the possibility of specifying more challenging computational systems.

Linear logic Concurrent Constraint programming (LCC) is an extension of concurrent constraint programming (CC), where the constraint system is based on Girard's linear logic instead of the classical logic. In this paper, we address the problem of program equivalence for this programming framework. For this purpose, we present a structural operational semantics for LCC based on a label transition system and investigate different notions of observational equivalences inspired by the state of art of process algebras. Then, we demonstrate that the asynchronous π-calculus can be viewed as simple syntactical restrictions of LCC. Finally, we show that LCC observational equivalences can be transposed straightforwardly to classical Concurrent Constraint languages and Constraint Handling Rules, and investigate the resulting equivalences.