Results 1  10
of
113
A Linear Logical Framework
, 1996
"... We present the linear type theory LLF as the forAppeared in the proceedings of the Eleventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science  LICS'96 (E. Clarke editor), pp. 264275, New Brunswick, NJ, July 2730 1996. mal basis for a conservative extension of the LF logical framework. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 238 (49 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present the linear type theory LLF as the forAppeared in the proceedings of the Eleventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science  LICS'96 (E. Clarke editor), pp. 264275, New Brunswick, NJ, July 2730 1996. mal basis for a conservative extension of the LF logical framework. LLF combines the expressive power of dependent types with linear logic to permit the natural and concise representation of a whole new class of deductive systems, namely those dealing with state. As an example we encode a version of MiniML with references including its type system, its operational semantics, and a proof of type preservation. Another example is the encoding of a sequent calculus for classical linear logic and its cut elimination theorem. LLF can also be given an operational interpretation as a logic programming language under which the representations above can be used for type inference, evaluation and cutelimination. 1 Introduction A logical framework is a formal system desig...
A concurrent logical framework I: Judgments and properties
, 2003
"... The Concurrent Logical Framework, or CLF, is a new logical framework in which concurrent computations can be represented as monadic objects, for which there is an intrinsic notion of concurrency. It is designed as a conservative extension of the linear logical framework LLF with the synchronous con ..."
Abstract

Cited by 86 (28 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The Concurrent Logical Framework, or CLF, is a new logical framework in which concurrent computations can be represented as monadic objects, for which there is an intrinsic notion of concurrency. It is designed as a conservative extension of the linear logical framework LLF with the synchronous connectives# of intuitionistic linear logic, encapsulated in a monad. LLF is itself a conservative extension of LF with the asynchronous connectives #, & and #.
Models of Sharing Graphs: A Categorical Semantics of let and letrec
, 1997
"... To my parents A general abstract theory for computation involving shared resources is presented. We develop the models of sharing graphs, also known as term graphs, in terms of both syntax and semantics. According to the complexity of the permitted form of sharing, we consider four situations of sha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 75 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
To my parents A general abstract theory for computation involving shared resources is presented. We develop the models of sharing graphs, also known as term graphs, in terms of both syntax and semantics. According to the complexity of the permitted form of sharing, we consider four situations of sharing graphs. The simplest is firstorder acyclic sharing graphs represented by letsyntax, and others are extensions with higherorder constructs (lambda calculi) and/or cyclic sharing (recursive letrec binding). For each of four settings, we provide the equational theory for representing the sharing graphs, and identify the class of categorical models which are shown to be sound and complete for the theory. The emphasis is put on the algebraic nature of sharing graphs, which leads us to the semantic account of them. We describe the models in terms of the notions of symmetric monoidal categories and functors, additionally with symmetric monoidal adjunctions and traced
A Reflection on CallbyValue
 ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems
, 1996
"... This article is a revised and extended version of a paper that appeared in the ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (Philadelphia, Pa.), 1996. Work started while the first author was at Chalmers University, and the second author was at University of Glasgow. Authors' a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 66 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This article is a revised and extended version of a paper that appeared in the ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (Philadelphia, Pa.), 1996. Work started while the first author was at Chalmers University, and the second author was at University of Glasgow. Authors' addresses: A. Sabry, University of Oregon, Department of Computer and Information Science, Eugene, OR 97403; P. Wadler, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, 700 Mountain Avenue, Room 2T304, Murray Hill, NJ 079740636. Permission to make digital/hard copy of all or part of this material without fee is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, the ACM copyright/server notice, the title of the publication, and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of the Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. (ACM). To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. c fl 1997 ACM 01640925/97/09000111 $03.50
A Judgmental Analysis of Linear Logic
, 2003
"... We reexamine the foundations of linear logic, developing a system of natural deduction following MartinL of's separation of judgments from propositions. Our construction yields a clean and elegant formulation that accounts for a rich set of multiplicative, additive, and exponential connectives ..."
Abstract

Cited by 61 (33 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We reexamine the foundations of linear logic, developing a system of natural deduction following MartinL of's separation of judgments from propositions. Our construction yields a clean and elegant formulation that accounts for a rich set of multiplicative, additive, and exponential connectives, extending dual intuitionistic linear logic but differing from both classical linear logic and Hyland and de Paiva's full intuitionistic linear logic. We also provide a corresponding sequent calculus that admits a simple proof of the admissibility of cut by a single structural induction. Finally, we show how to interpret classical linear logic (with or without the MIX rule) in our system, employing a form of doublenegation translation.
A Concurrent Logical Framework II: Examples and Applications
, 2002
"... CLF is a new logical framework with an intrinsic notion of concurrency. It is designed as a conservative extension of the linear logical framework LLF with the synchronous connectives # of intuitionistic linear logic, encapsulated in a monad. LLF is itself a conservative extension of LF with the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 59 (35 self)
 Add to MetaCart
CLF is a new logical framework with an intrinsic notion of concurrency. It is designed as a conservative extension of the linear logical framework LLF with the synchronous connectives # of intuitionistic linear logic, encapsulated in a monad. LLF is itself a conservative extension of LF with the asynchronous connectives #.
Distance makes the types grow stronger: A calculus for differential privacy
 In ICFP
, 2010
"... We want assurances that sensitive information will not be disclosed when aggregate data derived from a database is published. Differential privacy offers a strong statistical guarantee that the effect of the presence of any individual in a database will be negligible, even when an adversary has auxi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 54 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We want assurances that sensitive information will not be disclosed when aggregate data derived from a database is published. Differential privacy offers a strong statistical guarantee that the effect of the presence of any individual in a database will be negligible, even when an adversary has auxiliary knowledge. Much of the prior work in this area consists of proving algorithms to be differentially private one at a time; we propose to streamline this process with a functional language whose type system automatically guarantees differential privacy, allowing the programmer to write complex privacysafe query programs in a flexible and compositional way. The key novelty is the way our type system captures function sensitivity, a measure of how much a function can magnify the distance between similar inputs: welltyped programs not only can’t go wrong, they can’t go too far on nearby inputs. Moreover, by introducing a monad for random computations, we can show that the established definition of differential privacy falls out naturally as a special case of this soundness principle. We develop examples including known differentially private algorithms, privacyaware variants of standard functional programming idioms, and compositionality principles for differential privacy.
Focusing the inverse method for linear logic
 Proceedings of CSL 2005
, 2005
"... 1.1 Quantification and the subformula property.................. 3 1.2 Ground forward sequent calculus......................... 5 1.3 Lifting to free variables............................... 10 ..."
Abstract

Cited by 51 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
1.1 Quantification and the subformula property.................. 3 1.2 Ground forward sequent calculus......................... 5 1.3 Lifting to free variables............................... 10
Linear Logic, Monads and the Lambda Calculus
 In 11 th LICS
, 1996
"... Models of intuitionistic linear logic also provide models of Moggi's computational metalanguage. We use the adjoint presentation of these models and the associated adjoint calculus to show that three translations, due mainly to Moggi, of the lambda calculus into the computational metalanguage ( ..."
Abstract

Cited by 45 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Models of intuitionistic linear logic also provide models of Moggi's computational metalanguage. We use the adjoint presentation of these models and the associated adjoint calculus to show that three translations, due mainly to Moggi, of the lambda calculus into the computational metalanguage (direct, callbyname and callbyvalue) correspond exactly to three translations, due mainly to Girard, of intuitionistic logic into intuitionistic linear logic. We also consider extending these results to languages with recursion. 1. Introduction Two of the most significant developments in semantics during the last decade are Girard's linear logic [10] and Moggi's computational metalanguage [14]. Any student of these formalisms will suspect that there are significant connections between the two, despite their apparent differences. The intuitionistic fragment of linear logic (ILL) may be modelled in a linear model  a symmetric monoidal closed category with a comonad ! which satisfies some extr...
Light types for polynomial time computation in lambdacalculus
 In Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Syposium on Logic in Computer Science
, 2004
"... We propose a new type system for lambdacalculus ensuring that welltyped programs can be executed in polynomial time: Dual light affine logic (DLAL). DLAL has a simple type language with a linear and an intuitionistic type arrow, and one modality. It corresponds to a fragment of Light affine logic ..."
Abstract

Cited by 44 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We propose a new type system for lambdacalculus ensuring that welltyped programs can be executed in polynomial time: Dual light affine logic (DLAL). DLAL has a simple type language with a linear and an intuitionistic type arrow, and one modality. It corresponds to a fragment of Light affine logic (LAL). We show that contrarily to LAL, DLAL ensures good properties on lambdaterms: subject reduction is satisfied and a welltyped term admits a polynomial bound on the reduction by any strategy. Finally we establish that as LAL, DLAL allows to represent all polytime functions. 1