ACM Transactions on Computational Logic最新文献

We describe the categorical semantics for a simply typed variant and a simplified dependently typed variant of Cocon, a contextual modal type theory where the box modality mediates between the weak function space that is used to represent higher-order abstract syntax (HOAS) trees and the strong function space that describes (recursive) computations about them. What makes Cocon different from standard type theories is the presence of first-class contexts and contextual objects to describe syntax trees that are closed with respect to a given context of assumptions. Following M. Hofmann’s work, we use a presheaf model to characterise HOAS trees. Surprisingly, this model already provides the necessary structure to also model Cocon. In particular, we can capture the contextual objects of Cocon using a comonad ♭ that restricts presheaves to their closed elements. This gives a simple semantic characterisation of the invariants of contextual types (e.g. substitution invariance) and identifies Cocon as a type-theoretic syntax of presheaf models. We further extend this characterisation to dependent types using categories with families and show that we can model a fragment of Cocon without recursor in the Fitch-style dependent modal type theory presented by Birkedal et al.

A recent strand of research in structural proof theory aims at exploring the notion of analytic calculi (i.e., those calculi that support general and modular proof-strategies for cut elimination) and at identifying classes of logics that can be captured in terms of these calculi. In this context, Wansing introduced the notion of proper display calculi as one possible design framework for proof calculi in which the analyticity desiderata are realized in a particularly transparent way. Recently, the theory of properly displayable logics (i.e., those logics that can be equivalently presented with some proper display calculus) has been developed in connection with generalized Sahlqvist theory (a.k.a. unified correspondence). Specifically, properly displayable logics have been syntactically characterized as those axiomatized by analytic inductive axioms, which can be equivalently and algorithmically transformed into analytic structural rules so the resulting proper display calculi enjoy a set of basic properties: soundness, completeness, conservativity, cut elimination, and the subformula property. In this context, the proof that the given calculus is complete w.r.t. the original logic is usually carried out syntactically, i.e., by showing that a (cut-free) derivation exists of each given axiom of the logic in the basic system to which the analytic structural rules algorithmically generated from the given axiom have been added. However, so far, this proof strategy for syntactic completeness has been implemented on a case-by-case base and not in general. In this article, we address this gap by proving syntactic completeness for properly displayable logics in any normal (distributive) lattice expansion signature. Specifically, we show that for every analytic inductive axiom a cut-free derivation can be effectively generated that has a specific shape, referred to as pre-normal form.

In this article, we propose an approach to program verification using an abstract characterisation of weak memory models. Our approach is based on a hierarchical axiom scheme that captures the observational properties of a memory model. In particular, we show that it is possible to prove correctness of a program with respect to a particular axiom scheme, and we show this proof to suffice for any memory model that satisfies the axioms. Our axiom scheme is developed using a characterisation of weakest liberal preconditions for weak memory. This characterisation naturally extends to Hoare logic and Owicki-Gries reasoning by lifting weakest liberal preconditions (defined over read/write events) to the level of programs. We study three memory models (SC, TSO, and RC11-RAR) as example instantiations of the axioms, then we demonstrate the applicability of our reasoning technique on a number of litmus tests. The majority of the proofs in this article are supported by mechanisation within Isabelle/HOL.

Session subtyping is a cornerstone of refinement of communicating processes: a process implementing a session type (i.e., a communication protocol) T can be safely used whenever a process implementing one of its supertypes T′ is expected, in any context, without introducing deadlocks nor other communication errors. As a consequence, whenever T ≤ T′ holds, it is safe to replace an implementation of T′ with an implementation of the subtype T, which may allow for more optimised communication patterns. We present the first formalisation of the precise subtyping relation for asynchronous multiparty sessions. We show that our subtyping relation is sound(i.e., guarantees safe process replacement, as outlined above) and also complete: any extension of the relation is unsound. To achieve our results, we develop a novel session decomposition technique, from fullsession types (including internal/external choices) into single input/output session trees (without choices). We cover multiparty sessions with asynchronousinteraction, where messages are transmitted via FIFO queues (as in the TCP/IP protocol), and prove that our subtyping is both operationally and denotationally precise. Our session decomposition technique expresses the subtyping relation as a composition of refinement relations between single input/output trees, and providing a simple reasoning principle for asynchronous message optimisations.

Let V be a set of number-theoretical functions. We define a notion of V-realizability for predicate formulas in such a way that the indices of functions in V are used for interpreting the implication and the universal quantifier. In this paper we prove that Intuitionistic Predicate Calculus is sound with respect to the semantics of V-realizability if and only if some natural conditions for V hold.