The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as

Compilers for monomorphic languages, such as C and Pascal, take advantage of types to determine data representations, alignment, calling conventions, and register selection. However, these languages lack important features including polymorphism, abstract datatypes, and garbage collection. In contrast, modern programming languages such as Standard ML (SML), provide all of these features, but existing implementations fail to take full advantage of types. The result is that performance of SML code is quite bad when compared to C. In this thesis, I provide a general framework, called type-directed compilation, that allows compiler writers to take advantage of types at all stages in compilation. In the framework, types are used not only to determine efficient representations and calling conventions, but also to prove the correctness of the compiler. A key property of typedirected compilation is that all but the lowest levels of the compiler use typed intermediate languages. An advantage of this approach is that it provides a means for automatically checking the integrity of the resulting code. An important

We investigate semantical normalization proofs for typed combinatory logic and weak -calculus. One builds a model and a function `quote' which inverts the interpretation function. A normalization function is then obtained by composing quote with the interpretation function. Our models are just like the intended model, except that the function space includes a syntactic component as well as a semantic one. We call this a `glued' model because of its similarity with the glueing construction in category theory. Other basic type constructors are interpreted as in the intended model. In this way we can also treat inductively defined types such as natural numbers and Brouwer ordinals. We also discuss how to formalize -terms, and show how one model construction can be used to yield normalization proofs for two different typed -calculi -- one with explicit and one with implicit substitution. The proofs are formalized using Martin-Lof's type theory as a meta language and mechanized using the A...

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

We investigate the problem of translating between different styles of proof systems in higherorder logic: analytic proofs which are well suited for automated theorem proving, and nonanalytic deductions which are well suited for the mathematician. Analytic proofs are represented as expansion proofs, H, a form of the sequent calculus we define, non-analytic proofs are represented by natural deductions. A non-deterministic translation algorithm between expansion proofs and H-deductions is presented and its correctness is proven. We also present an algorithm for translation in the other direction and prove its correctness. A cut-elimination algorithm for expansion proofs is given and its partial correctness is proven. Strong termination of this algorithm remains a conjecture for the full higher-order system, but is proven for the first-order fragment. We extend the translations to a non-analytic proof system which contains a primitive notion of equality, while leaving the notion of expansion proof unaltered. This is possible, since a non-extensional equality is definable in our system of type theory. Next we extend analytic and non-analytic proof systems and the translations between them to include extensionality. Finally, we show how the methods and notions used so far apply to the problem of translating expansion proofs into natural deductions. Much care is taken to specify this translation in a

this paper we describe a new, categorical approach to normalization in typed -

Abstract not found

Type-checking algorithms for dependent type theories often rely on the interpretation of terms in some semantic domain of values when checking equalities. Here we analyze a version of Coquand’s algorithm for checking the βη-equality of such semantic values in a theory with a predicative universe hierarchy and large elimination rules. Although this algorithm does not rely on normalization by evaluation explicitly, we show that similar ideas can be employed for its verification. In particular, our proof uses the new notions of contextual reification and strong semantic equality. The algorithm is part of a bi-directional type checking algorithm which checks whether a normal term has a certain semantic type, a technique notion of semantic domain in order to accommodate a variety of possible implementation techniques, such as normal forms, weak head normal forms, closures, and compiled code. Our aim is to get closer than previous work to verifying the type-checking algorithms which are actually used in practice.

We present a systematic construction of a reduction-free normalization function. Starting from