Non-Idempotent Typing Operators, beyond the λ-calculus

Transcription

1 Non-Idempotent Typing Operators, beyond the λ-calculus Soutenance de thèse Pierre VIAL IRIF (Univ. Paris Diderot and CNRS) December 7, 2017 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 0 1 /46

2 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

3 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = 1 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

4 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = 2 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

5 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = 3 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

6 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = 4 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

7 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x =... Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

8 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = 100 Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

9 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x =... Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

10 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

11 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = The core of this thesis Termination or productivity (via source codes) Paths to terminal states. For that, using types (data descriptors). Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

12 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = The core of this thesis Termination or productivity (via source codes) Paths to terminal states. For that, using types (data descriptors). Productivity: O. S. 2, 3, 5, 7,... (primes) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

13 Certification and logic in computer science x = 1 while (x > 0): x = x + 1 transfer( $, calyon, my-account) print("i m rich now") x = The core of this thesis Termination or productivity (via source codes) Paths to terminal states. For that, using types (data descriptors). Productivity: O. S. 2, 3, 5, 7,... (primes) Backtracking: Classical logic. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 2 /46

14 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

15 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

16 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

17 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. x, H (x) M (x) H (S) M (S) M (S) H (S) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

18 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. x, H (x) M (x) H (S) M (S) M (S) H (S) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

19 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. x, H (x) M (x) H (S) M (S) M (S) H (S) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

20 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. x, H (x) M (x) H (S) M (S) M (S) H (S) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

21 Formal logic (valar morghulis) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All ringtus are delgo. Vinkri is a ringtu. Therefore, Vinkri is delgo. x, H (x) M (x) H (S) M (S) M (S) H (S) Formalization Reduce semantic (= meaning) to mechanical/grammatical/syntactic rules. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 3 /46

22 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

23 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

24 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements Provable True Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

25 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements Provable True primitive recursive functions (poor) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

26 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements Provable True primitive recursive functions (poor) Can computation save mathematics? Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

27 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements primitive recursive functions (poor) Provable True Can computation save mathematics? What is an algo.? What is effectively computable? Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

28 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Gödel, 1931: unprovable statements primitive recursive functions (poor) Provable True Can computation save mathematics? What is an algo.? What is effectively computable? Turing machines (1936) TM are universal f effectively computable iff f implementable in a TM A prog. language L is Turing-complete if L has the same computational power as TMs. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

29 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

30 Turing and computability Entscheidung (1928): given a symbolic statement, is there an algorithmic procedure to decide whether it is true or not? Theorem (Turing, 1936) The Entscheidungsproblem has a negative answer The halting problem is undecidable: there does not exist a general method deciding whether any program terminates or not. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 4 /46

31 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

32 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

33 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

34 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

35 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) S S S O + S S O S S S S O + S O S S S S S O + O S S S S S O Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

36 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) S S S O + S S O S S S S O + S O S S S S S O + O S S S S S O Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

37 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) S S S O + S S O S S S S O + S O S S S S S O + O S S S S S O Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

38 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) S S S O + S S O S S S S O + S O S S S S S O + O S S S S S O Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

39 Computation as rewriting The λ-calculus One primitive. Functional paradigm. Turing complete. Allows to emulate many rewriting systems e.g.: Example (implementing natural numbers) O : zero S : successor Thus: S O 1 S S O 2 S S S S S O 5. Addition n + O n (terminal case) n + S m S n + m (inductive case) S S S O + S S O S S S S O + S O S S S S S O + O S S S S S O Most structures (tabs, strings, pair of integers) can be implemented in this fashion or in the λ-calculus. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 5 /46

40 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u x x Variable λx λx.t Abstraction t u Application Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

41 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u x λx x y x Variable λx.t Abstraction t u Application x λy Example: x(λy.x y) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

42 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u x x Variable λx λx.t Abstraction t u Application Redex (reducible expression): computation via substitution producing a reduct Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

43 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Redex: (λx.r)s Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u r x λx x Variable λx.t Abstraction t u Application λx s Redex (reducible expression): computation via substitution producing a reduct Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

44 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Redex: (λx.r)s Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u x r x λx x x x Variable λx.t Abstraction t u Application λx s Redex (reducible expression): computation via substitution producing a reduct Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

45 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u x r x λx x x x Variable λx.t Abstraction t u Application λx s Redex (reducible expression): computation via substitution producing a reduct Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

46 λ-calcul (Church, 1928) Reduct: r[s/x] Term construction (inductive grammar) t t u s s r s x x Variable λx λx.t Abstraction t u Application Redex (reducible expression): computation via substitution producing a reduct Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 6 /46

47 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

48 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: autoapp(f) f(f) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

49 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: autoapp(f) f(f) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

50 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(f) f(f) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

51 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

52 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

53 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

54 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

55 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: Remember autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Some programs that do not terminate are still meaningful: the streams. Keep on producing terminated values. Example: The program printing 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, (the list of primes). Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

56 Higher-order functions and their (possible) dangers Let app 2 (f, x) := f(f(x)). app 2 takes a function f as an argument. app 2 is a higher-order function. Autoapplication is defined by: Auto-autoapplication: Remember autoapp(f) f(f) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) autoapp(autoapp) Some programs that do not terminate are still meaningful: the streams. Keep on producing terminated values. Example: The program printing 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, (the list of primes). Contribution: characterizing productive streams. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 7 /46

57 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies }{{} }{{} 17 Reducible (non-terminal) states Terminal state Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

58 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies }{{} }{{} 17 Reducible (non-terminal) states Terminal state Let f(x) = x x x. What is the value of f(3 + 4)? on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

59 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies }{{} }{{} 17 Reducible (non-terminal) states Terminal state Let f(x) = x x x. What is the value of f(3 + 4)? Kim (smart) f(3 + 4) f(7) Lee (not so) f(3 + 4) (3 + 4) (3 + 4) (3 + 4) 7 (3 + 4) (3 + 4) 7 7 (3 + 4) Thurston (don t be Thurston) f(3 + 4) (3 + 4) (3 + 4) (3 + 4) 3 (3 + 4) (3 + 4) + 4 (3 + 4) (3 + 4) dozens of computation steps Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

60 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies }{{} }{{} 17 Reducible (non-terminal) states Terminal state Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

61 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

62 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies Initial state Terminal state Infinite path (keeps running, never reaches the terminal state) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

63 Terminal states and execution/reduction strategies Reduction strategy Initial state Terminal state Infinite path (keeps running, never reaches the terminal state) Reduction strategy Choice of a reduction path. Can be complete Must be certified. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 8 /46

64 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

65 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Primitive types: 5: int (integer) Leopard : String (string of characters) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

66 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Primitive types: 5: int (integer) Leopard : String (string of characters) Compound types: length : String int (function) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

67 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

68 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Example Let toletters : int String be the program: toletters(2) = two toletters(10) = ten Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

69 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Example Let toletters : int String be the program: toletters(2) = two toletters(10) = ten toletters(5) toletters( Leopard ) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

70 Types Principle Types = data descriptors, following a grammar. Types provide certifications of correction. Example Let toletters : int String be the program: toletters(2) = two toletters(10) = ten toletters(5) toletters( Leopard ) Correct! Returns five Incorrect! The arg. Leopard is not an int. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

71 Types toletters(5) Correct! Returns five toletters( Leopard ) Incorrect! The arg. Leopard is not an int. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

72 Types toletters : int String toletters(5) : String Typing certificate 5 : int toletters(5) Correct! Returns five toletters( Leopard ) Incorrect! The arg. Leopard is not an int. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

73 Types toletters : int String toletters(5) : String 5 : int A B B A Typing certificate Proof toletters(5) Correct! Returns five toletters( Leopard ) Incorrect! The arg. Leopard is not an int. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

74 Types int String String int A B B A Typing certificate Proof toletters(5) Correct! Returns five toletters( Leopard ) Incorrect! The arg. Leopard is not an int. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

75 Types toletters : int String toletters(5) : String 5 : int A B B A Typing certificate Proof This analogy goes further! Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

76 Types int String String int A B B A Typing certificate Proof This analogy goes further! Curry-Howard correspondence! Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 9 /46

77 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination toletters : int String toletters(5) : String 5 : int A B B A Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

78 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination Simple types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

79 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination Simple types Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

80 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination Simple types Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. extensions Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

81 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination Simple types Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. extensions Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

82 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Simple types Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination λ-calculus Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. extensions Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

83 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Simple types Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination λ-calculus Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. Does not capture classical logic extensions Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

84 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Simple types Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination λ-calculus Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. extensions Does not capture classical logic Get classical logic with call cc (Griffin, 90) Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

85 Curry-Howard (50s) Programming languages Type Simply Typed Program Reduction Step Termination Simple types Logic Formula Proof Cut-Elimination Step Termination λ-calculus Harness higher-order comput. in a limited way. Many progs. in terminal state not typable. extensions Does not capture classical logic Get classical logic with call cc (Griffin, 90) Polymorphic Types Intersection Types Contribution Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 10 /46

86 Cut-Elimination (animation) A A A B B Number of occurrences: ψ A A Φ B Π A ψ : 1 Φ : 1 Π : 1 A B F Initial proof of F (using two lemmas) Goal: having a one-block proof Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 11 /46

87 Cut-Elimination (animation) ψ ψ ψ B B ψ Φ ψ B Π ψ Number of occurrences: ψ : 6 Φ : 1 Π : 1 B F After one cut-elim. step (one lemma) Goal: having a one-block proof Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 11 /46

88 Cut-Elimination (animation) ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Φ Π ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Number of occurrences: ψ : 10 Φ : 3 Π : 1 F Goal: having a one-block proof Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 11 /46

89 Cut-Elimination (animation) ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Φ Π ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Number of occurrences: ψ : 10 Φ : 3 Π : 1 F After two cut-elim. steps Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 11 /46

90 Cut-Elimination (animation) ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Φ Π ψ ψ ψ Φ ψ ψ Number of occurrences: ψ : 10 Φ : 3 Π : 1 F Theorem (Gentzen, 1936, Prawitz, 1965) The cut-elimination procedure terminates (and tells us a lot of things). Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 11 /46

91 Intersections types (Coppo, Dezani, 1980) Goal Equivalences of the form the program t is typable iff it can reach a terminal state Idea: several certificates to a same subprogram. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 12 /46

92 Intersections types (Coppo, Dezani, 1980) Goal Equivalences of the form the program t is typable iff it can reach a terminal state Idea: several certificates to a same subprogram. Proof: by the circular implications: t is typable t can reach a terminal state Some reduction strategy terminates on t on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 12 /46

93 Intersections types (Coppo, Dezani, 1980) Goal Equivalences of the form the program t is typable iff it can reach a terminal state Idea: several certificates to a same subprogram. Proof: by the circular implications: t is typable t can reach a terminal state Some reduction strategy terminates on t Intersection types Perhaps too expressive but certify reduction strategies! Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 12 /46

94 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

95 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

96 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

97 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

98 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

99 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

100 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. STOP (cannot be reduced more) Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

101 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Initial certificate Initial state of the prog. STOP (cannot be reduced more) Terminal state reached!! Execution on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

102 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

103 Non-idempotency Computation causes duplication. Non-idempotent intersection types Disallow duplication for typing certificates. Possibly many certificates for a subprogram. Size of certificates decreases. Comparative (dis)advantages Insanely difficult to type a particular program. Whole type system easier to study! Easier proofs of termination! Easier proofs of characterization! Easier to certify a reduction strategy! on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 13 /46

104 Contents Gardner/de Caravalho s non-idempotent type system. Contribution 1: Quantitative types for the λµ-calculus (a classical calculus) Certificates of reduction strategies. Contribution 2: Positive answer to Klop s Problem. Certification of an infinitary reduction strategy. Introduction of a new type system: system S (standing for sequences). Contribution 3: Around the expressive power of unconstrained infinitary intersection types. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 1 Presentation 14 /46

105 Plan 1 Presentation 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 3 Resources for Classical Logic 4 Infinite types and productive reduction 5 Infinite types and unproductive reduction 6 Conclusion on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 15 /46

106 Head Normalization (λ) r x t 1 λx s t 1 head variable t q head redex t q λxp λxp Head Normal Form Head Reducible Term Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

107 Head Normalization (λ) r x t 1 λx s t 1 head variable t q head redex t q λxp λxp Head Normal Form Head Reducible Term t is head normalizing (HN) if reduction path from t to a HNF. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

108 Head Normalization (λ) r x t 1 λx s t 1 head variable t q head redex t q λxp λxp Head Normal Form Head Reducible Term t is head normalizing (HN) if reduction path from t to a HNF. The head reduction strategy: reducing head redexes while it is possible. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

109 Head Normalization (λ) t is head normalizing (HN) if reduction path from t to a HNF. The head reduction strategy: reducing head redexes while it is possible. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

110 Head Normalization (λ) obvious the head reduction strategy terminates on t t is HN ( path from t to a HNF) true but not obvious t is head normalizing (HN) if reduction path from t to a HNF. The head reduction strategy: reducing head redexes while it is possible. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

111 Head Normalization (λ) obvious the head reduction strategy terminates on t t is HN ( path from t to a HNF) true but not obvious The head reduction strategy: reducing head redexes while it is possible. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

112 Head Normalization (λ) obvious the head reduction strategy terminates on t t is HN ( path from t to a HNF) true but not obvious Intersection types come to help! The head reduction strategy: reducing head redexes while it is possible. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 16 /46

113 Subject Reduction and Subject Expansion A good intersection type system should enjoy: Subject Reduction (SR): Typing is stable under reduction. Subject Expansion (SE): Typing is stable under antireduction. SE is usually not verified by simple or polymorphic type systems on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 17 /46

114 Subject Reduction and Subject Expansion A good intersection type system should enjoy: Subject Reduction (SR): Typing is stable under reduction. Subject Expansion (SE): Typing is stable under antireduction. SE is usually not verified by simple or polymorphic type systems typing the term. states + SE t is typable SR + extra arg. t can reach a terminal state Some reduction strategy terminates on t obvious on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 17 /46

115 From Intersection Types to Quantitative Types Types are built by means of base types, arrow ( ) and intersection ( ). Associativity (A D) C A (D C) ACI Axioms = Commutativity A D D A Idempotence A A A on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 18 /46

116 From Intersection Types to Quantitative Types Types are built by means of base types, arrow ( ) and intersection ( ). Associativity (A D) C A (D C) ACI Axioms = Commutativity A D D A Idempotence A A A Traditional Intersection Types Quantitative Types Coppo & Dezani 80 Gardner 94 - Kfoury 96 ACI (Idempotent) AC (Non-idempotent) Types are sets: A A C is {A, C} Types are multisets: A A C is [A, A, C] Qualitative properties Quantitative properties Remark (non-idem. case): [A, A, C] [A, C] i.e. A A C A C. [A, B] + [A] = [A, A, B] i.e. is multiset sum. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 18 /46

117 Types and Rules (System R 0 ) (Strict Types) τ, σ := o O I τ (Intersection Types) I := [σ i] i I Strict types syntax directed rules: x : [τ] x : τ ax Γ; x : [σ i] i I t : τ Γ λx.t : [σ i] i I τ abs Γ t : [σ i] i I τ (Γ i u : σ i) i I app Γ + i I Γ i t u : τ System R 0 Remark Relevant system (no weakening) In app-rule, pointwise multiset sum e.g., (x : [σ]; y : [τ]) + (x : [σ, τ]) = x : [σ, σ, τ]; y : [τ] Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 19 /46

118 Properties (R 0 ) Weighted Subject Reduction Reduction preserves types and environments, and head reduction strictly decreases the nodes of the deriv. tree. Subject Expansion Anti-reduction preserves types and environments. Theorem (de Carvalho) Let t be a λ-term. Then equivalence between: 1 t is typable (in R 0) 2 t is HN 3 the head reduction strategy terminates on t ( certification!) Bonus (quantitative information) If Π types t, then sizeπ bounds the number of steps of the head. red. strategy on t. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 20 /46

119 Head vs Weak and Strong Normalization Let t be a λ-term. Head normalization (HN): there is a path from t to a head normal form. Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 21 /46

120 Head vs Weak and Strong Normalization Let t be a λ-term. Head normalization (HN): there is a path from t to a head normal form. Weak normalization (WN): there is at least one path from t to normal form (NF). Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 21 /46

121 Head vs Weak and Strong Normalization Let t be a λ-term. Head normalization (HN): there is a path from t to a head normal form. Weak normalization (WN): there is at least one path from t to normal form (NF). Strong normalization (SN): there is no infinite path starting at t. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 21 /46

122 Head vs Weak and Strong Normalization Let t be a λ-term. Head normalization (HN): there is a path from t to a head normal form. Weak normalization (WN): there is at least one path from t to normal form (NF). Strong normalization (SN): there is no infinite path starting at t. Normalization SN WN HN. Nota Bene: y Ω HNF but not WN (λx.y)ω WN but not SN on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 21 /46

123 Characterizing Weak and Strong Normalization HN System R 0 sz(π) bounds the number of any arg. can be left untyped head reduction steps WN System R 0 + unforgetfulness criterion non-erasable args must be typed sz(π) bounds the number of leftmost-outermost red. steps (and more) SN Modify system R 0 with choice operator all args must be typed sz(π) bounds the length of any reduction path Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 22 /46

124 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

125 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

126 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

127 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

128 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 By relevance and non-idempotence! ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

129 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

130 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 1] x:σ 1 ax x:[σ 2] x:σ 2 Π a 1 Π 2 Π b 1 Γ; x :[σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] r : τ abs Γ λx.r : [σ 1, σ 2, σ 1] τ a 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b (λx.r)s : τ b 1 s:σ 1 app Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

131 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] Π a 1 Π b 1 a 1 s:σ 1 Π 2 b 1 s:σ 1 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b r[s/x] : τ Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

132 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] Π a 1 Π b 1 a 1 s:σ 1 Π 2 b 1 s:σ 1 Non-determinism of SR 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b r[s/x] : τ Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

133 Subject reduction and expansion in R 0 From a typing of (λx.r)s... to a typing of r[s/x] Π b 1 Π a 1 b 1 s:σ 1 Π 2 a 1 s:σ 1 Non-determinism of SR 2 s:σ 2 Γ + a 1 + b r[s/x] : τ Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 23 /46

134 Plan 1 Presentation 2 Non-idempotent intersection types 3 Resources for Classical Logic 4 Infinite types and productive reduction 5 Infinite types and unproductive reduction 6 Conclusion on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 24 /46

135 The Lambda-Mu Calculus Intuit. logic + Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A gives classical logic. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 25 /46

136 The Lambda-Mu Calculus Intuit. logic + Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A gives classical logic. Griffin 90: call cc and Felleisen s C-operator typable with Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A the Curry-Howard iso extends to classical logic on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 25 /46

137 The Lambda-Mu Calculus Intuit. logic + Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A gives classical logic. Griffin 90: call cc and Felleisen s C-operator typable with Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A the Curry-Howard iso extends to classical logic Parigot 92: λµ-calculus = computational interpretation of classical natural deduction (e.g., vs. λµ µ). on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 25 /46

138 The Lambda-Mu Calculus Intuit. logic + Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A gives classical logic. Griffin 90: call cc and Felleisen s C-operator typable with Peirce s Law ((A B) A) A the Curry-Howard iso extends to classical logic Parigot 92: λµ-calculus = computational interpretation of classical natural deduction (e.g., vs. λµ µ). Captures continuations on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 25 /46

139 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

140 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

141 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

142 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

143 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = [α](x (µγ.[α]x u))u Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

144 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = [α](x (µγ.[α]x u))u call cc := λy.µα.[α]y(λx.µβ.[α]x) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

145 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = [α](x (µγ.[α]x u))u call cc := λy.µα.[α]y(λx.µβ.[α]x) : ((A B) A) A (simple typing) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

146 The λµ-calculus Syntax: Variables x and names α (Objects) o ::= t c (Terms) t, u ::= x λx.t tu µα.c (Commands) c ::= [α]t Basic Meta-Operations: t[u/x] (subst.) c{u /α} replaces every occurrence of [α]v inside t by [α]v u. Example: [α](x (µγ.[α]x)){u /α} = [α](x (µγ.[α]x u))u call cc := λy.µα.[α]y(λx.µβ.[α]x) : ((A B) A) A (simple typing) Operational Semantics: (λx.t)u β t[u/x] substitution (µα.c)u µ µα.c{u /α} replacement on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 26 /46

147 The Typing System Principles Extend non-idempotent types to classical logic. Problem 1: finding quantitative descriptors suitable to classical logic Problem 2: guaranteeing a decrease in measure (weighted s.r.) on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 27 /46

148 The Typing System Principles Extend non-idempotent types to classical logic. Problem 1: finding quantitative descriptors suitable to classical logic resort to non-idempotent union types (below right) Problem 2: guaranteeing a decrease in measure (weighted s.r.) Not obvious! The number of nodes does not work (see later). on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 27 /46

149 The Typing System Principles Extend non-idempotent types to classical logic. Problem 1: finding quantitative descriptors suitable to classical logic resort to non-idempotent union types (below right) Problem 2: guaranteeing a decrease in measure (weighted s.r.) Not obvious! The number of nodes does not work (see later). Intersection: I, J := [U k ] k K U, V =: σ k k K : Union on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 27 /46

150 The Typing System Principles Extend non-idempotent types to classical logic. Problem 1: finding quantitative descriptors suitable to classical logic resort to non-idempotent union types (below right) Problem 2: guaranteeing a decrease in measure (weighted s.r.) Not obvious! The number of nodes does not work (see later). Intersection: I, J := [U k ] k K U, V =: σ k k K : Union x : [U 1, U 2]; y : [V] t : U α : σ 1, σ 2, β : τ 1, τ 2, τ 3 on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 27 /46

151 The Typing System Principles Extend non-idempotent types to classical logic. Problem 1: finding quantitative descriptors suitable to classical logic resort to non-idempotent union types (below right) Problem 2: guaranteeing a decrease in measure (weighted s.r.) Not obvious! The number of nodes does not work (see later). Intersection: I, J := [U k ] k K U, V =: σ k k K : Union x : [U 1, U 2]; y : [V] t : U α : σ 1, σ 2, β : τ 1, τ 2, τ 3 A, C and non-i e.g., σ 1, σ 2 σ 1 = σ 1, σ 2, σ 1 on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 27 /46

152 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Non-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46

153 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Two new rules (manipulation on the right-h.s.): Γ t : U Γ [α]t : # {α : U} save Γ c : # Γ µα.c : (α) \\ α restore on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46

154 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Two new rules (manipulation on the right-h.s.): Γ t : U Γ [α]t : # {α : U} save Γ c : # Γ µα.c : (α) \\ α restore on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46

155 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Two new rules (manipulation on the right-h.s.): Γ t : U Γ [α]t : # {α : U} save Γ c : # Γ µα.c : (α) \\ α restore on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46

156 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Two new rules (manipulation on the right-h.s.): Γ t : U Γ [α]t : # {α : U} save Γ c : # Γ µα.c : (α) \\ α restore on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46

157 Some Typing Rules (System H λµ ) Features Syntax-direction, relevance, multiplicative rules accumulation of typing information. app-rule based upon the admissible rule of ND: A 1 B 1... A k B k A 1... A k B 1... B k ( vs. A B B A ) Two new rules (manipulation on the right-h.s.): Γ t : U Γ [α]t : # {α : U} save Γ c : # Γ µα.c : (α) \\ α restore where = choice operator. on-idempotent typing operators P. Vial 3 Resources for Classical Logic 28 /46