Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userA Three-Valued Semantics for Typed Logic Programming
349
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
EPTCS
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Authors
Jo~ao Barbosa
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Types in logic programming have focused on conservative approximations of program semantics by regular types, on one hand, and on type systems based on a prescriptive semantics defined for typed programs, on the other. In this paper, we define a new semantics for logic programming, where programs evaluate to true, false, and to a new semantic value called wrong, corresponding to a run-time type error. We then have a type language with a separated semantics of types. Finally, we define a type system for logic programming and prove that it is semantically sound with respect to a semantic relation between programs and types where, if a program has a type, then its semantics is not wrong. Our work follows Milners approach for typed functional languages where the semantics of programs is independent from the semantic of types, and the type system is proved to be sound with respect to a relation between both semantics.
rate research
Read More
Besides respecting prescribed protocols, communication-centric systems should never get stuck. This requirement has been expressed by liveness properties such as progress or (dead)lock freedom. Several typing disciplines that ensure these properties for mobile processes have been proposed. Unfortunately, very little is known about the precise relationship between these disciplines--and the classes of typed processes they induce. In this paper, we compare L and K, two classes of deadlock-free, session typed concurrent processes. The class L stands out for its canonicity: it results naturally from interpretations of linear logic propositions as session types. The class K, obtained by encoding session types into Kobayashis usage types, includes processes not typable in other type systems. We show that L is strictly included in K. We also identify the precise condition under which L and K coincide. One key observation is that the degree of sharing between parallel processes determines a new expressiveness hierarchy for typed processes. We also provide a type-preserving rewriting procedure of processes in K into processes in L. This procedure suggests that, while effective, the degree of sharing is a rather subtle criteria for distinguishing typed processes.
We present a weakest-precondition-style calculus for reasoning about the expected values (pre-expectations) of emph{mixed-sign unbounded} random variables after execution of a probabilistic program. The semantics of a while-loop is well-defined as the limit of iteratively applying a functional to a zero-element just as in the traditional weakest pre-expectation calculus, even though a standard least fixed point argument is not applicable in this context. A striking feature of our semantics is that it is always well-defined, even if the expected values do not exist. We show that the calculus is sound, allows for compositional reasoning, and present an invariant-based approach for reasoning about pre-expectations of loops.
We give an adequate denotational semantics for languages with recursive higher-order types, continuous probability distributions, and soft constraints. These are expressive languages for building Bayesian models of the kinds used in computational statistics and machine learning. Among them are untyped languages, similar to Church and WebPPL, because our semantics allows recursive mixed-variance datatypes. Our semantics justifies important program equivalences including commutativity. Our new semantic model is based on `quasi-Borel predomains. These are a mixture of chain-complete partial orders (cpos) and quasi-Borel spaces. Quasi-Borel spaces are a recent model of probability theory that focuses on sets of admissible random elements. Probability is traditionally treated in cpo models using probabilistic powerdomains, but these are not known to be commutative on any class of cpos with higher order functions. By contrast, quasi-Borel predomains do support both a commutative probabilistic powerdomain and higher-order functions. As we show, quasi-Borel predomains form both a model of Fiores axiomatic domain theory and a model of Kocks synthetic measure theory.
The optimization phase of a compiler is responsible for transforming an intermediate representation (IR) of a program into a more efficient form. Modern optimizers, such as that used in the GraalVM compiler, use an IR consisting of a sophisticated graph data structure that combines data flow and control flow into the one structure. As part of a wider project on the verification of optimization passes of GraalVM, this paper describes a semantics for its IR within Isabelle/HOL. The semantics consists of a big-step operational semantics for data nodes (which are represented in a graph-based static single assignment (SSA) form) and a small-step operational semantics for handling control flow including heap-based reads and writes, exceptions, and method calls. We have proved a suite of canonicalization optimizations and conditional elimination optimizations with respect to the semantics.
In this paper we provide two new semantics for proofs in the constructive modal logics CK and CD. The first semantics is given by extending the syntax of combinatorial proofs for propositional intuitionistic logic, in which proofs are factorised in a linear fragment (arena net) and a parallel weakening-contraction fragment (skew fibration). In particular we provide an encoding of modal formulas by means of directed graphs (modal arenas), and an encoding of linear proofs as modal arenas equipped with vertex partitions satisfying topological criteria. The second semantics is given by means of winning innocent strategies of a two-player game over modal arenas. This is given by extending the Heijltjes-Hughes-Stra{ss}burger correspondence between intuitionistic combinatorial proofs and winning innocent strategies in a Hyland-Ong arena. Using our first result, we provide a characterisation of winning strategies for games on a modal arena corresponding to proofs with modalities.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
