Least fixpoints as meanings of recursive definitions.

We present a game semantics for Linear Logic, in which formulas denote games and proofs denote winning strategies. We show that our semantics yields a categorical model of Linear Logic and prove full completeness for Multiplicative Linear Logic with the MIX rule: every winning strategy is the denotation of a unique cut-free proof net. A key role is played by the notion of history-free strategy; strong connections are made between history-free strategies and the Geometry of Interaction. Our semantics incorporates a natural notion of polarity, leading to a refined treatment of the additives. We make comparisons with related work by Joyal, Blass et al.

We propose Interaction Categories as a new paradigm for the semantics of functional and concurrent computation. Interaction categories have specifications as objects, processes as morphisms, and interaction as composition. We introduce two key examples of interaction categories for concurrent computation and indicate how a general axiomatisation can be developed. The upshot of our approach is that traditional process calculus is reconstituted in functorial form, and integrated with type theory and functional programming.

. This tutorial paper provides an introduction to intuitionistic logic and linear logic, and shows how they correspond to type systems for functional languages via the notion of `Propositions as Types'. The presentation of linear logic is simplified by basing it on the Logic of Unity. An application to the array update problem is briefly discussed. 1 Introduction Some of the best things in life are free; and some are not. Truth is free. Having proved a theorem, you may use this proof as many times as you wish, at no extra cost. Food, on the other hand, has a cost. Having baked a cake, you may eat it only once. If traditional logic is about truth, then linear logic is about food. In traditional logic, if a fact is used to conclude another fact, the first fact is still available. For instance, given that A implies B and given A, one may deduce both A and B. In symbols, this is written as the judgement A ! B; A ` A \Theta B (i) where A ! B is read `A implies B', and A \Theta B is read `...

We propose a typed calculus of synchronous processes based on the structure of interaction categories. Our aim has been to develop a calculus for concurrency that is canonical in the sense that the typed -calculus is canonical for functional computation. We show strong connections between syntax, logic and semantics, analogous to the familiar correspondence between the typed -calculus, intuitionistic logic and cartesian closed categories. 1 Introduction T ypes are fundamental to the study of functional computation, for both theoretical and practical reasons. On the foundational side there are elegant connections between the typed -calculus, intuitionistic logic and cartesian closed categories, leading to the Propositions as Types paradigm [14] and the development of categorical logic [9,17]. From a practical point of view, compile-time type reconstruction is a boon to the programmer in languages such as Standard ML and Haskell. Turning to concurrency, the situation is much less sati...

An overview of linear logic is given, including an extensive bibliography and a simple example of the close relationship between linear logic and computation.

A new concurrent form of game semantics is introduced. This overcomes the problems which had arisen with previous, sequential forms of game semantics in modelling Linear Logic. It also admits an elegant and robust formalization. A Full Completeness Theorem for MultiplicativeAdditive Linear Logic is proved for this semantics. 1 Introduction This paper contains two main contributions: ffl the introduction of a new form of game semantics, which we call concurrent games. ffl a proof of full completeness of this semantics for Multiplicative-Additive Linear Logic. We explain the significance of each of these in turn. Concurrent games Traditional forms of game semantics which have appeared in logic and computer science have been sequential in format: a play of the game is formalized as a sequence of moves. The key feature of this sequential format is the existence of a global schedule (or polarization) : in each (finite) position, it is (exactly) one player's turn to move 1 . This seq...

This paper is an overview of existing applications of Linear Logic (LL) to issues of computation. After a substantial introduction to LL, it discusses the implications of LL to functional programming, logic programming, concurrent and object-oriented programming and some other applications of LL, like semantics of negation in LP, non-monotonic issues in AI planning, etc. Although the overview covers pretty much the state-of-the-art in this area, by necessity many of the works are only mentioned and referenced, but not discussed in any considerable detail. The paper does not presuppose any previous exposition to LL, and is addressed more to computer scientists (probably with a theoretical inclination) than to logicians. The paper contains over 140 references, of which some 80 are about applications of LL. 1 Linear Logic Linear Logic (LL) was introduced in 1987 by Girard [62]. From the very beginning it was recognized as relevant to issues of computation (especially concurrency and stat...

this paper was quite di#erent, stemming from the axiomatics of categories of tangles (although the authors were aware of possible connections to iteration theories. In fact, similar axiomatics in the symmetric case, motivated by flowcharts and "flownomials" had been developed some years earlier by Stefanescu (Stefanescu 2000).) However, the first author realized, following a stimulating discussion with Gordon Plotkin, that traced monoidal categories provided a common denominator for the axiomatics of both the Girard-style and Abramsky-Jagadeesan-style versions of the Geometry of Interaction, at the basic level of the multiplicatives. This insight was presented in (Abramsky 1996), in which Girard-style GoI was dubbed "particle-style", since it concerns information particles or tokens flowing around a network, while the Abramsky-Jagadeesan style GoI was dubbed "wave-style", since it concerns the evolution of a global information state or "wave". Formally, this distinction is based on whether the tensor product (i.e. the symmetric monoidal structure) in the underlying category is interpreted as a coproduct (particle style) or as a product (wave style). This computational distinction between coproduct and product interpretations of the same underlying network geometry turned out to have been partially anticipated, in a rather di#erent context, in a pioneering paper by E. S. Bainbridge (Bainbridge 1976), as observed by Dusko Pavlovic. These two forms of interpretation, and ways of combining them, have also been studied recently in (Stefanescu 2000). He uses the terminology "additive" for coproduct-based (i.e. our "particle-style") and "multiplicative" for product-based (i.e. our "wave-style"); this is not suitable for our purposes, because of the clash with Linear Logic term...

Abstract not found