Abstract. Proof search has been used to specify a wide range of computation systems. In order to build a framework for reasoning about such specifications, we make use of a sequent calculus involving induction and co-induction. These proof principles are based on a proof theoretic (rather than set-theoretic) notion of definition [13, 20, 25, 51]. Definitions are akin to (stratified) logic programs, where the left and right rules for defined atoms allow one to view theories as “closed ” or defining fixed points. The use of definitions makes it possible to reason intensionally about syntax, in particular enforcing free equality via unification. We add in a consistent way rules for pre and post fixed points, thus allowing the user to reason inductively and co-inductively about properties of computational system making full use of higher-order abstract syntax. Consistency is guaranteed via cut-elimination, where we give the first, to our knowledge, cut-elimination procedure in the presence of general inductive and co-inductive definitions. 1

Abstract. We define representations of continuous functions on infinite streams of discrete values, both in the case of discrete-valued functions, and in the case of stream-valued functions. We define also an operation on the representations of two continuous functions between streams that yields a representation of their composite. In the case of discrete-valued functions, the representatives are well-founded (finitepath) trees of a certain kind. The underlying idea can be traced back to Brouwer’s justification of bar-induction, or to Kreisel and Troelstra’s elimination of choice-sequences. In the case of stream-valued functions, the representatives are non-wellfounded trees pieced together in a coinductive fashion from well-founded trees. The definition requires an alternating fixpoint construction of some ubiquity.

We propose a novel approach to proving the termination of heapmanipulating programs, which combines separation logic with cyclic proof within a Hoare-style proof system. Judgements in this system express (guaranteed) termination of the program when started from a given line in the program and in a state satisfying a given precondition, which is expressed as a formula of separation logic. The proof rules of our system are of two types: logical rules that operate on preconditions; and symbolic execution rules that capture the effect of executing program commands. Our logical preconditions employ inductively defined predicates to describe heap properties, and proofs in our system are cyclic proofs: cyclic derivations in which some inductive predicate is unfolded infinitely often along every infinite path, thus allowing us to discard all infinite paths in the proof by an infinite descent argument. Moreover, the use of this soundness condition enables us to avoid the explicit construction and use of ranking functions for termination. We also give a completeness result for our system, which is relative in that it relies upon completeness of a proof system for logical implications in separation logic. We give examples illustrating our approach, including one example for which the corresponding ranking function is non-obvious: termination of the classical algorithm for in-place reversal of a (possibly cyclic) linked list.

We study the proof-theoretic relationship between two deductive systems for the modal mu-calculus. First we recall an infinitary system which contains an omega rule allowing to derive the truth of a greatest fixed point from the truth of each of its (infinitely many) approximations. Then we recall a second infinitary calculus which is based on non-well-founded trees. In this system proofs are finitely branching but may contain infinite branches as long as some greatest fixed point is unfolded infinitely often along every branch. The main contribution of our paper is a translation from proofs in the first system to proofs in the second system. Completeness of the second system then follows from completeness of the first, and a new proof of the finite model property also follows as corollary. 1

Abstract. We present a framework for inductive definitions in the logic of bunched implications, BI, and formulate two sequent calculus proof systems for inductive reasoning in this framework. The first proof system adopts a traditional approach to inductive proof, extending the usual sequent calculus for predicate BI with explicit induction rules for the inductively defined predicates. The second system allows an alternative mode of reasoning with inductive definitions by cyclic proof. In this system, the induction rules are replaced by simple case-split rules, and the proof structures are cyclic graphs formed by identifying some sequent occurrences in a derivation tree. Because such proof structures are not sound in general, we demand that cyclic proofs must additionally satisfy a global trace condition that ensures soundness. We illustrate our inductive definition framework and proof systems with simple examples which indicate that, in our setting, cyclic proof may enjoy certain advantages over the traditional induction approach. 1

We instantiate the general comonad-based construction of recursion schemes for the initial algebra of a functor F to the cofree recursive comonad on F. Differently from the scheme based on the cofree comonad on F in a similar fashion, this scheme allows not only recursive calls on elements structurally smaller than the given argument, but also subsidiary recursions. We develop a Mendler formulation of the scheme via a generalized Yoneda lemma for initial algebras involving strong dinaturality and hint a relation to circular proofs à la Cockett, Santocanale.

One lesson learned painfully over the past twenty years is the perilous interaction of Curry-style typing with evaluation order and side-effects. This led eventually to the value restriction on polymorphism in ML, as well as, more recently, to similar artifacts in type systems for ML with intersection and union refinement types. For example, some of the traditional subtyping laws for unions and intersections are unsound in the presence of effects, while union-elimination requires an evaluation context restriction in addition to the value restriction on intersection-introduction. Our aim is to show that rather than being ad hoc artifacts, phenomena such as the value and evaluation context restrictions arise naturally in type systems for effectful languages, out of principles of duality. Beginning with a review of recent work on the Curry-Howard interpretation of focusing proofs as pattern-matching programs,

A linear approach to the proof-theory of least and greatest fixed points Présentée et soutenue publiquement par

We considers how a particular kind of graph corresponds to multiplicative intuitionistic linear logic formula. The main feature of the graphical notation is that it absorbs certain symmetries between conjunction and implication. We look at the basic definitions and present details of an implementation in the functional programming language Standard ML. This provides a functional approach to graph traversal and demonstrates how graph isomorphism be implemented in just a few lines of readable code. This works takes the initial steps towards a graphical language and toolkit for working with logic formula and derivations. 1

Vol. 5 (3:9) 2009, pp. 1–17 www.lmcs-online.org