Results 1  10
of
10
Domain Theory in Logical Form
 Annals of Pure and Applied Logic
, 1991
"... The mathematical framework of Stone duality is used to synthesize a number of hitherto separate developments in Theoretical Computer Science: • Domain Theory, the mathematical theory of computation introduced by Scott as a foundation for denotational semantics. • The theory of concurrency and system ..."
Abstract

Cited by 231 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The mathematical framework of Stone duality is used to synthesize a number of hitherto separate developments in Theoretical Computer Science: • Domain Theory, the mathematical theory of computation introduced by Scott as a foundation for denotational semantics. • The theory of concurrency and systems behaviour developed by Milner, Hennessy et al. based on operational semantics. • Logics of programs. Stone duality provides a junction between semantics (spaces of points = denotations of computational processes) and logics (lattices of properties of processes). Moreover, the underlying logic is geometric, which can be computationally interpreted as the logic of observable properties—i.e. properties which can be determined to hold of a process on the basis of a finite amount of information about its execution. These ideas lead to the following programme:
Compilation and Equivalence of Imperative Objects
, 1998
"... We adopt the untyped imperative object calculus of Abadi and Cardelli as a minimal setting in which to study problems of compilation and program equivalence that arise when compiling objectoriented languages. We present both a bigstep and a smallstep substitutionbased operational semantics fo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We adopt the untyped imperative object calculus of Abadi and Cardelli as a minimal setting in which to study problems of compilation and program equivalence that arise when compiling objectoriented languages. We present both a bigstep and a smallstep substitutionbased operational semantics for the calculus. Our rst two results are theorems asserting the equivalence of our substitutionbased semantics with a closurebased semantics like that given by Abadi and Cardelli. Our third result is a direct proof of the correctness of compilation to a stackbased abstract machine via a smallstep decompilation algorithm. Our fourth result is that contextual equivalence of objects coincides with a form of Mason and Talcott's CIU equivalence; the latter provides a tractable means of establishing operational equivalences. Finally, we prove correct an algorithm, used in our prototype compiler, for statically resolving method osets. This is the rst study of correctness of an objectoriented abstract machine, and of operational equivalence for the imperative object calculus.
Domain Theoretic Models Of Polymorphism
, 1989
"... We give an illustration of a construction useful in producing and describing models of Girard and Reynolds' polymorphic calculus. The key unifying ideas are that of a Grothendieck fibration and the category of continuous sections associated with it, constructions used in indexed category theory; th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We give an illustration of a construction useful in producing and describing models of Girard and Reynolds' polymorphic calculus. The key unifying ideas are that of a Grothendieck fibration and the category of continuous sections associated with it, constructions used in indexed category theory; the universal types of the calculus are interpreted as the category of continuous sections of the fibration. As a major example a new model for the polymorphic calculus is presented. In it a type is interpreted as a Scott domain. In fact, understanding universal types of the polymorphic calculus as categories of continuous sections appears to be useful generally. For example, the technique also applies to the finitary projection model of Bruce and Longo, and a recent model of Girard. (Indeed the work here was inspired by Girard's and arose through trying to extend the construction of his model to Scott domains.) It is hoped that by pinpointing a key construction this paper will help towards...
A proof of strong normalisation using domain theory
 In LICS’06
, 2006
"... U. Berger, [11] significantly simplified Tait’s normalisation proof for bar recursion [27], see also [9], replacing Tait’s introduction of infinite terms by the construction of a domain having the property that a term is strongly normalizing if its semantics is. The goal of this paper is to show tha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
U. Berger, [11] significantly simplified Tait’s normalisation proof for bar recursion [27], see also [9], replacing Tait’s introduction of infinite terms by the construction of a domain having the property that a term is strongly normalizing if its semantics is. The goal of this paper is to show that, using ideas from the theory of intersection types [2, 6, 7, 21] and MartinLöf’s domain interpretation of type theory [18], we can in turn simplify U. Berger’s argument in the construction of such a domain model. We think that our domain model can be used to give modular proofs of strong normalization for various type theory. As an example, we show in some details how it can be used to prove strong normalization for MartinLöf dependent type theory extended with bar recursion, and with some form of proofirrelevance. 1
A Lambda Model Characterizing Computational Behaviours of Terms
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AND LIKAVEC INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP REWRITING IN PROOF AND COMPUTATION
, 2001
"... We build a lambda model which characterizes completely (persistently) normalizing, (persistently) head normalizing, and (persistently) weak head normalizing terms. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We build a lambda model which characterizes completely (persistently) normalizing, (persistently) head normalizing, and (persistently) weak head normalizing terms.
Two behavioural lambda models
 Types for Proofs and Programs
, 2003
"... Abstract. We build a lambda model which characterizes completely (persistently) normalizing, (persistently) head normalizing, and (persistently) weak head normalizing terms. This is proved by using the finitary logical description of the model obtained by defining a suitable intersection type assign ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We build a lambda model which characterizes completely (persistently) normalizing, (persistently) head normalizing, and (persistently) weak head normalizing terms. This is proved by using the finitary logical description of the model obtained by defining a suitable intersection type assignment system.
Data Types, Infinity and Equality in System AF2
 In CSL ’93, volume 832 of LNCS
, 1995
"... This work presents an extension of system AF 2 to allow the use of infinite data types. We extend the logic with inductive and coinductive types, and show that the "programming method" is still correct. Unlike previous work in other typesystems, we only use the pure calculus. Propositions about no ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This work presents an extension of system AF 2 to allow the use of infinite data types. We extend the logic with inductive and coinductive types, and show that the "programming method" is still correct. Unlike previous work in other typesystems, we only use the pure calculus. Propositions about normalization and unicity of the representation of data have no equivalent in other systems. Moreover, the class of data types we consider is very large with some unusual ones. 1 Introduction Since the work of Curry, a lot of typesystems have been created (e.g., De Bruijn's Automath [4]; Girard's system F [5]; MartinLof's type theory [10]; CoquandHuet's Calculus of construction [3]; etc). One of their purposes is program extraction via the CurryHoward isomorphism [6], which establishes a correspondence between programs and proofs of specifications. One of these systems is AF 2 (second order functional arithmetic) due to Leivant and Krivine [9, 7, 8]. It uses equations as algorithmic specif...
Behavioural Inverse Limit λModels
, 2003
"... We construct two inverse limit λmodels which completely characterise sets of terms with similar computational behaviours: the sets of normalising, head normalising, weak head normalising λterms, those corresponding to the persistent versions of these notions, and the sets of closable, closable nor ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We construct two inverse limit λmodels which completely characterise sets of terms with similar computational behaviours: the sets of normalising, head normalising, weak head normalising λterms, those corresponding to the persistent versions of these notions, and the sets of closable, closable normalising, and closable head normalising λterms. More precisely, for each of these sets of terms there is a corresponding element in at least one of the two models such that a term belongs to the set if and only if its interpretation (in a suitable environment) is greater than or equal to that element. We use the finitary logical description of the models, obtained by defining suitable intersection type assignment systems, to prove this.
Author manuscript, published in "LICS 2006, Seatle: United States (2006)" DOI: 10.1109/LICS.2006.8 A proof of strong normalisation using domain theory
, 2009
"... U. Berger, [11] significantly simplified Tait’s normalisation proof for bar recursion [27], see also [9], replacing Tait’s introduction of infinite terms by the construction of a domain having the property that a term is strongly normalizing if its semantics is. The goal of this paper is to show tha ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
U. Berger, [11] significantly simplified Tait’s normalisation proof for bar recursion [27], see also [9], replacing Tait’s introduction of infinite terms by the construction of a domain having the property that a term is strongly normalizing if its semantics is. The goal of this paper is to show that, using ideas from the theory of intersection types [2, 6, 7, 21] and MartinLöf’s domain interpretation of type theory [18], we can in turn simplify U. Berger’s argument in the construction of such a domain model. We think that our domain model can be used to give modular proofs of strong normalization for various type theory. As an example, we show in some details how it can be used to prove strong normalization for MartinLöf dependent type theory extended with bar recursion, and with some form of proofirrelevance. 1