Results 1 
3 of
3
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. LLF c ..."
Abstract

Cited by 217 (44 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...
Intuitionistic Model Constructions and Normalization Proofs
, 1998
"... 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 ..."
Abstract

Cited by 44 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
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 MartinLof's type theory as a meta language and mechanized using the A...