Closure conversion is a program transformation at work in compilers for functional languages to turn inner functions into global ones, by building closures pairing the transformed functions with the environment of their free variables. Abstract machines rely on similar and yet different concepts of closures and environments. We study the relationship between the two approaches. We adopt a simple λ -calculus with tuples as source language and study abstract machines for both the source language and the target of closure conversion. Moreover, we focus on the simple case of flat closures/environments (no sharing of environments). We provide three contributions. Firstly, a new simple proof technique for the correctness of closure conversion, inspired by abstract machines. Secondly, we show how the closure invariants of the target language allow us to design a new way of handling environments in abstract machines, not suffering the shortcomings of other styles.

We investigate non-wellfounded proof systems based on parsimonious logic, a weaker variant of linear logic where the exponential modality ! is interpreted as a constructor for streams over finite data. Logical consistency is maintained at a global level by adapting a standard progressing criterion. We present an infinitary version of cut-elimination based on finite approximations, and we prove that, in presence of the progressing criterion, it returns well-defined non-wellfounded proofs at its limit. Furthermore, we show that cut-elimination preserves the progressing criterion and various regularity conditions internalizing degrees of proof-theoretical uniformity. Finally, we provide a denotational semantics for our systems based on the relational model.

This paper studies the notion of meaningfulness for a unifying framework called dBang-calculus, which subsumes both call-by-name (dCbN) and call-by-value (dCbV). We first characterize meaningfulness in dBang by means of typability and inhabitation in an associated non-idempotent intersection type system previously proposed in the literature. We validate the proposed notion of meaningfulness by showing two properties (1) consistency of the theory $\mathcal{H}$ equating meaningless terms and (2) genericity, stating that meaningless subterms have no bearing on the significance of meaningful terms. The theory $\mathcal{H}$ is also shown to have a unique consistent and maximal extension. Last but not least, we show that the notions of meaningfulness and genericity in the literature for dCbN and dCbV are subsumed by the respectively ones proposed here for the dBang-calculus.

Abstract This paper studies the strength of embedding Call-by-Name () and Call-by-Value () into a unifying framework called the Bang Calculus (). These embeddings enable establishing (static and dynamic) properties of and through their respective counterparts in $$\texttt {dBANG} $$ dBANG . While some specific static properties have been already successfully studied in the literature, the dynamic ones are more challenging and have been left unexplored. We accomplish that by using a standard embedding for the (easy) case, while a novel one must be introduced for the (difficult) case. Moreover, a key point of our approach is the identification of diligent reduction sequences, which eases the preservation of dynamic properties from $$\texttt {dBANG} $$ dBANG to $$\texttt {dCBN}/\texttt {dCBV} $$ dCBN / dCBV . We illustrate our methodology through two concrete applications: confluence/factorization for both and are respectively derived from confluence/factorization for .

A fundamental issue in the λ-calculus is to find appropriate notions for meaningfulness. It is well-known that in the call-by-name λ-calculus (CbN) the meaningful terms can be identified with the solvable ones, and that this notion is not appropriate in the call-by-value λ-calculus (CbV). This paper validates the challenging claim that yet another notion, previously introduced in the literature as potential valuability (and later renamed scrutability), appropriately represents meaningfulness in CbV. Akin to CbN, this claim is corroborated by proving two essential properties. The first one is genericity, stating that meaningless subterms have no bearing on evaluating normalizing terms. To prove this (which was an open problem), we use a novel approach based on stratified reduction, indifferently applicable to CbN and CbV, and in a quantitative way. The second property concerns consistency of the smallest congruence relation resulting from equating all meaningless terms. While the consistency result is not new, we provide the first direct operational proof of it. We also show that such a congruence has a unique consistent and maximal extension, which coincides with a well-known notion of observational equivalence. Our results thus supply the formal concepts and tools that validate the informal notion of meaningfulness underlying CbN and CbV.

We solve the inhabitation problem for a language called λ!, a subsuming paradigm (inspired by call-by-push-value) being able to encode, among others, call-by-name and call-by-value strategies of functional programming. The type specification uses a non-idempotent intersection type system, which is able to capture quantitative properties about the dynamics of programs. As an application, we show how our general methodology can be used to derive inhabitation algorithms for different lambda-calculi that are encodable into λ!.

We present a technique to study normalizing strategies when termination is asymptotic, that is, it appears as a limit, as opposite to reaching a normal form in a finite number of steps. Asymptotic termination occurs in several settings, such as effectful, and in particular probabilistic computation -- where the limits are distributions over the possible outputs -- or infinitary lambda-calculi -- where the limits are infinitary normal forms such as Boehm trees. As a concrete application, we obtain a result which is of independent interest: a normalization theorem for Call-by-Value (and -- in a uniform way -- for Call-by-Name) probabilistic lambda-calculus.

A Multiplicative-Exponential Linear Logic (MELL) proof-structure can be expanded into a set of resource proof-structures: its Taylor expansion. We introduce a new criterion characterizing (and deciding in the finite case) those sets of resource proof-structures that are part of the Taylor expansion of some MELL proof-structure, through a rewriting system acting both on resource and MELL proof-structures. We also prove semi-decidability of the type inhabitation problem for cut-free MELL proof-structures.

Abstract We study the reduction in a $\lambda$ -calculus derived from Moggi’s computational one, which we call the computational core. The reduction relation consists of rules obtained by orienting three monadic laws. Such laws, in particular associativity and identity, introduce intricacies in the operational analysis. We investigate the central notions of returning a value versus having a normal form and address the question of normalizing strategies. Our analysis relies on factorization results.

The semantics of the untyped (call-by-name) lambda-calculus is a well developed field built around the concept of solvable terms, which are elegantly characterized in many different ways. In particular, unsolvable terms provide a consistent notion of meaningless term. The semantics of the untyped call-by-value lambda-calculus (CbV) is instead still in its infancy, because of some inherent difficulties but also because CbV solvable terms are less studied and understood than in call-by-name. On the one hand, we show that a carefully crafted presentation of CbV allows us to recover many of the properties that solvability has in call-by-name, in particular qualitative and quantitative characterizations via multi types. On the other hand, we stress that, in CbV, solvability plays a different role: identifying unsolvable terms as meaningless induces an inconsistent theory.

Factorization -- a simple form of standardization -- is concerned with reduction strategies, i.e. how a result is computed. We present a new technique for proving factorization theorems for compound rewriting systems in a modular way, which is inspired by the Hindley-Rosen technique for confluence. Specifically, our technique is well adapted to deal with extensions of the call-by-name and call-by-value lambda-calculi. The technique is first developed abstractly. We isolate a sufficient condition (called linear swap) for lifting factorization from components to the compound system, and which is compatible with beta-reduction. We then closely analyze some common factorization schemas for the lambda-calculus. Concretely, we apply our technique to diverse extensions of the lambda-calculus, among which de' Liguoro and Piperno's non-deterministic lambda-calculus and -- for call-by-value -- Carraro and Guerrieri's shuffling calculus. For both calculi the literature contains factorization theorems. In both cases, we give a new proof which is neat, simpler than the original, and strikingly shorter.

We investigate intersection types and resource lambda-calculus in deep-inference proof theory. We give a unified type system that is parametric in various aspects: it encompasses resource calculi, intersection-typed lambda-calculus, and simply-typed lambda-calculus; it accommodates both idempotence and non-idempotence; it characterizes strong and weak normalization; and it does so while allowing a range of algebraic laws to determine reduction behaviour, for various quantitative effects. We give a parametric resource calculus with explicit sharing, the "collection calculus", as a Curry-Howard interpretation of the type system, that embodies these computational properties.

Non-idempotent intersection types can be seen as a syntactic presentation of a well-known denotational semantics for the lambda-calculus, the category of sets and relations. Building on previous work, we present a categorification of this line of thought in the framework of the bang calculus, an untyped version of Levy’s call-by-push-value. We define a bicategorical model for the bang calculus, whose syntactic counterpart is a suitable category of types. In the framework of distributors, we introduce intersection type distributors, a bicategorical proof relevant refinement of relational semantics. Finally, we prove that intersection type distributors characterize normalization at depth 0.

Abstract In each variant of the $$\lambda $$ λ -calculus, factorization and normalization are two key properties that show how results are computed. Instead of proving factorization/normalization for the call-by-name (CbN) and call-by-value (CbV) variants separately, we prove them only once, for the bang calculus (an extension of the $$\lambda $$ λ -calculus inspired by linear logic and subsuming CbN and CbV), and then we transfer the result via translations, obtaining factorization/normalization for CbN and CbV. The approach is robust: it still holds when extending the calculi with operators and extra rules to model some additional computational features.

A Multiplicative-Exponential Linear Logic (MELL) proof-structure can be expanded into a set of resource proof-structures: its Taylor expansion. We introduce a new criterion characterizing those sets of resource proof-structures that are part of the Taylor expansion of some MELL proof-structure, through a rewriting system acting both on resource and MELL proof-structures.

Abstract A notion of probabilistic lambda-calculus usually comes with a prescribed reduction strategy, typically call-by-name or call-by-value, as the calculus is non-confluent and these strategies yield different results. This is a break with one of the main advantages of lambda-calculus: confluence, which means results are independent from the choice of strategy. We present a probabilistic lambda-calculus where the probabilistic operator is decomposed into two syntactic constructs: a generator, which represents a probabilistic event; and a consumer, which acts on the term depending on a given event. The resulting calculus, the Probabilistic Event Lambda-Calculus, is confluent, and interprets the call-by-name and call-by-value strategies through different interpretations of the probabilistic operator into our generator and consumer constructs. We present two notions of reduction, one via fine-grained local rewrite steps, and one by generation and consumption of probabilistic events. Simple types for the calculus are essentially standard, and they convey strong normalization. We demonstrate how we can encode call-by-name and call-by-value probabilistic evaluation.

A cornerstone of the theory of $$\lambda $$ -calculus is that intersection types characterise termination properties. They are a flexible tool that can be adapted to various notions of termination, and that also induces adequate denotational models. Since the seminal work of de Carvalho in 2007, it is known that multi types (i.e. non-idempotent intersection types) refine intersection types with quantitative information and a strong connection to linear logic. Typically, type derivations provide bounds for evaluation lengths, and minimal type derivations provide exact bounds. De Carvalho studied call-by-name evaluation, and Kesner used his system to show the termination equivalence of call-by-need and call-by-name. De Carvalho’s system, however, cannot provide exact bounds on call-by-need evaluation lengths. In this paper we develop a new multi type system for call-by-need. Our system produces exact bounds and induces a denotational model of call-by-need, providing the first tight quantitative semantics of call-by-need.

Extending the λ-calculus with a construct for sharing, such as let expressions, enables a special representation of terms: iterated applications are decomposed by introducing sharing points in between any two of them, reducing to the case where applications have only values as immediate subterms.

We study an extension of Plotkin's call-by-value lambda-calculus via two commutation rules (sigma-reductions). These commutation rules are sufficient to remove harmful call-by-value normal forms from the calculus, so that it enjoys elegant characterizations of many semantic properties. We prove that this extended calculus is a conservative refinement of Plotkin's one. In particular, the notions of solvability and potential valuability for this calculus coincide with those for Plotkin's call-by-value lambda-calculus. The proof rests on a standardization theorem proved by generalizing Takahashi's approach of parallel reductions to our set of reduction rules. The standardization is weak (i.e. redexes are not fully sequentialized) because of overlapping interferences between reductions. Comment: 27 pages

We introduce and study the Bang Calculus, an untyped functional calculus in which the promotion operation of Linear Logic is made explicit and where application is a bilinear operation. This calculus, which can be understood as an untyped version of Call-By-Push-Value, subsumes both Call-By-Name and Call-By-Value lambda-calculi, factorizing the Girard's translations of these calculi in Linear Logic. We build a denotational model of the Bang Calculus based on the relational interpretation of Linear Logic and prove an adequacy theorem by means of a resource Bang Calculus whose design is based on Differential Linear Logic.