This work is dedicated to my parents. Acknowledgments Firstly, and foremost, I would like to thank my principal advisor, Frank Pfenning, for his patience with me, and for teaching me most of what I know about logic and type theory. I would also like to acknowledge some useful discussions with Kevin Watkins which led me to simplify some of this work. Finally, I would like to thank my other advisor, John Reynolds, for all his kindness and support over the last five years. Abstract This thesis introduces a new logical system, ordered linear logic, which combines reasoning with unrestricted, linear, and ordered hypotheses. The logic conservatively extends (intuitionistic) linear logic, which contains both unrestricted and linear hypotheses, with a notion of ordered hypotheses. Ordered hypotheses must be used exactly once, subject to the order in which they were assumed (i.e., their order cannot be changed during the course of a derivation). This ordering constraint allows for logical representations of simple data structures such as stacks and queues. We construct ordered linear logic in the style of Martin-L"of from the basic notion of a hypothetical judgement. We then show normalization for the system by constructing a sequent calculus presentation and proving cut-elimination of the sequent system.

We present a meta-logic that contains a new quantifier (for encoding "generic judgment") and inference rules for reasoning within fixed points of a given specification. We then specify the operational semantics and bisimulation relations for the finite π-calculus within this meta-logic. Since we

This paper describes a general method of compiler implementation using higher order abstract syntax and logic programming. A working compiler written in Prolog is used to demonstrate this method.

Abstract. We present the natural confluence of higher-order hereditary Harrop formulas (HH formulas) as developed concretely in λProlog, Constraint Logic Programming (CLP, [JL87]), and Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP, [Sar93]) as a fragment of (intuitionistic, higher-order) logic. The combination is motivated by the need for a simple executable, logical presentation for static and dynamic semantics of modern programming languages. The power of HH formulas is needed for higher-order abstract syntax, and the power of constraints is needed to naturally abstract the underlying domain of computation. Underpinning this combination is a sound and complete operational interpretation of a two-sided sequent presentation of (a large fragment of) intuitionistic logic in terms of behavioral testing of concurrent systems. Formulas on the left hand side of a sequent style presentation are viewed as a system of concurrent agents, and formulas on the right hand side as tests against this evolving system. The language permits recursive definitions of agents and tests, allows tests to augment the system being tested and allows agents to be contingent on the success of a test. We present a condition on proofs, operational derivability (OD), and show that the operational semantics generates only operationally derivable proofs. We show that a sequent in this logic has a proof iff it has an operationally derivable proof. 1

Abstract not found

Higher-order representations of objects such as programs, specifications and proofs are important to many metaprogramming and symbolic computation tasks. Systems that support such representations often depend on the implementation of an intensional view of the terms of suitable typed lambda calculi. Refined lambda calculus notations have been proposed that can be used in realizing such implementations. There are, however, choices in the actual deployment of such notations whose practical consequences are not well understood. Towards addressing this lacuna, the impact of three specific ideas is examined: the de Bruijn representation of bound variables, the explicit encoding of substitutions in terms and the annotation of terms to indicate their independence on external abstractions. Qualitative assessments are complemented by experiments over actual computations using the lambdaProlog language.

Logical equivalence between logic programs that are firstorder logic formulas holds between few logic programs, partly because first-order logic does not allow auxiliary programs and data structures to be hidden. As a result of not having such abstractions, logical equivalence will force these auxiliaries to be present in any equivalence program.

The operational semantics of programming and specification languages is often presented via inference rules and these can generally be mapped into logic programming-like clauses. Such logical encodings of operational semantics can be surprisingly declarative if one uses logics that directly account for term-level bindings and for resources, such as are found in linear logic. Traditional theorem proving techniques, such as unification and backtracking search, can then be applied to animate operational semantic specifications. Of course, one wishes to go a step further than animation: using logic to encode computation should facilitate formal reasoning directly with semantic specifications. We outline an approach to reasoning about logic specifications that involves viewing logic specifications as theories in an object-logic and then using a meta-logic to reason about properties of those object-logic theories. We motivate the principal design goals of a particular meta-logic that has been built for that purpose.

Abstract. Higher-order pattern unification problems arise often in computations carried out within systems such as Twelf, λProlog and Isabelle. An important characteristic of such problems is that they are given by equations appearing under a prefix of alternating universal and existential quantifiers. Existing algorithms for solving these problems assume that such prefixes are simplified to a ∀∃ ∀ form by an a priori application of a transformation known as raising. There are drawbacks to this approach. Mixed quantifier prefixes typically manifest themselves in the course of computation, thereby requiring a dynamic form of preprocessing that is difficult to support in low-level implementations. Moreover, raising may be redundant in many cases and its effect may have to be undone by a subsequent pruning transformation. We propose a method to overcome these difficulties. In particular, a unification algorithm is described that proceeds by recursively descending through the structures of terms, performing raising and other transformations on-the-fly and only as needed. This algorithm also exploits an explicit substitution notation for lambda terms. 1

Many metalanguages and logical frameworks have emerged in recent years that use the terms of the lambda calculus as data structures. A common set of questions govern the suitability of a representation for lambda terms in the implementation of such systems: -convertibility must be easily recognizable, sharing in reduction steps, term traversal and term structure must be possible, comparison and unification operations should be eciently supported and it should be possible to examine terms embedded inside abstractions. Explicit substitution notations for lambda calculi provide a basis for realizing such requirements. We discuss here the issues related to using one such notation -- the suspension notation of Nadathur and Wilson -- in this capacity. This notation has been used in two significant practical systems: the Standard ML of New Jersey compiler and the Teyjus implementation of Prolog. We expose the theoretical properties of this notation, highlight pragmatic considerations in its use in implementing operations such as reduction and unification and discuss its relationship to other explicit substitution notations.