We investigate the tree-to-tree functions computed by "affine λ-transducers": tree automata whose memory consists of an affine λ-term instead of a finite state. They can be seen as variations on Gallot, Lemay and Salvati’s Linear High-Order Deterministic Tree Transducers. When the memory is almost purely affine (à la Kanazawa), we show that these machines can be translated to tree-walking transducers (and with a purely affine memory, we get a reversible tree-walking transducer). This leads to a proof of an inexpressivity conjecture of Nguyễn and Pradic on "implicit automata" in an affine λ-calculus. We also prove that a more powerful variant, extended with preprocessing by an MSO relabeling and allowing a limited amount of non-linearity, is equivalent in expressive power to Engelfriet, Hoogeboom and Samwel’s invisible pebble tree transducers. The key technical tool in our proofs is the Interaction Abstract Machine (IAM), an operational avatar of Girard’s geometry of interaction, a semantics of linear logic. We work with ad-hoc specializations to λ-terms of low exponential depth of a tree-generating version of the IAM.

A fundamental theme in automata theory is regular languages of words and trees, and their many equivalent definitions. Salvati has proposed a generalization to regular languages of simply typed λ-terms, defined using denotational semantics in finite sets. We provide here some evidence for its robustness. First, we give an equivalent syntactic characterization that naturally extends the seminal work of Hillebrand and Kanellakis connecting regular languages of words and syntactic λ-definability. Second, we show that any finitary extensional model of the simply typed λ-calculus, when used in Salvati’s definition, recognizes exactly the same class of languages of λ-terms as the category of finite sets does. The proofs of these two results rely on logical relations and can be seen as instances of a more general construction of a categorical nature, inspired by previous categorical accounts of logical relations using the gluing construction.

International audience

We consider the following decision problem: given two simply typed $\lambda$-terms, are they $\beta$-convertible? Equivalently, do they have the same normal form? It is famously non-elementary, but the precise complexity - namely TOWER-complete - is lesser known. One goal of this short paper is to popularize this fact. Our original contribution is to show that the problem stays TOWER-complete when the two input terms belong to Blum and Ong's safe $\lambda$-calculus, a fragment of the simply typed $\lambda$-calculus arising from the study of higher-order recursion schemes. Previously, the best known lower bound for this safe $\beta$-convertibility problem was PSPACE-hardness. Our proof proceeds by reduction from the star-free expression equivalence problem, taking inspiration from the author's work with Pradic on "implicit automata in typed $\lambda$-calculi". These results also hold for $\beta\eta$-convertibility.

International audience

Pomset logic and BV are both logics that extend multiplicative linear logic (with Mix) with a third connective that is self-dual and non-commutative. Whereas pomset logic originates from the study of coherence spaces and proof nets, BV originates from the study of series-parallel orders, cographs, and proof systems. Both logics enjoy a cut-admissibility result, but for neither logic can this be done in the sequent calculus. Provability in pomset logic can be checked via a proof net correctness criterion and in BV via a deep inference proof system. It has long been conjectured that these two logics are the same. In this paper we show that this conjecture is false. We also investigate the complexity of the two logics, exhibiting a huge gap between the two. Whereas provability in BV is NP-complete, provability in pomset logic is $\Sigma_2^p$-complete. We also make some observations with respect to possible sequent systems for the two logics.

BV and pomset logic are two logics that both conservatively extend unit-free multiplicative linear logic by a third binary connective, which (i) is non-commutative, (ii) is self-dual, and (iii) lies between the "par" and the "tensor". It was conjectured early on (more than 20 years ago), that these two logics, that share the same language, that both admit cut elimination, and whose connectives have essentially the same properties, are in fact the same. In this paper we show that this is not the case. We present a formula that is provable in pomset logic but not in BV.

This paper introduces a new automata-theoretic class of string-to-string functions with polynomial growth. Several equivalent definitions are provided: a machine model which is a restricted variant of pebble transducers, and a few inductive definitions that close the class of regular functions under certain operations. Our motivation for studying this class comes from another characterization, which we merely mention here but prove elsewhere, based on a λ-calculus with a linear type system. As their name suggests, these comparison-free polyregular functions form a subclass of polyregular functions; we prove that the inclusion is strict. We also show that they are incomparable with HDT0L transductions, closed under usual function composition - but not under a certain "map" combinator - and satisfy a comparison-free version of the pebble minimization theorem. On the broader topic of polynomial growth transductions, we also consider the recently introduced layered streaming string transducers (SSTs), or equivalently k-marble transducers. We prove that a function can be obtained by composing such transducers together if and only if it is polyregular, and that k-layered SSTs (or k-marble transducers) are closed under "map" and equivalent to a corresponding notion of (k+1)-layered HDT0L systems.

This paper establishes a bridge between linear logic and mainstream graph theory, building on previous work by Retor\'e (2003). We show that the problem of correctness for MLL+Mix proof nets is equivalent to the problem of uniqueness of a perfect matching. By applying matching theory, we obtain new results for MLL+Mix proof nets: a linear-time correctness criterion, a quasi-linear sequentialization algorithm, and a characterization of the sub-polynomial complexity of the correctness problem. We also use graph algorithms to compute the dependency relation of Bagnol et al. (2015) and the kingdom ordering of Bellin (1997), and relate them to the notion of blossom which is central to combinatorial maximum matching algorithms. In this journal version, we have added an explanation of Retor\'e's "RB-graphs" in terms of a general construction on graphs with forbidden transitions. In fact, it is by analyzing RB-graphs that we arrived at this construction, and thus obtained a polynomial-time algorithm for finding trails avoiding forbidden transitions; the latter is among the material covered in another paper by the author focusing on graph theory (arXiv:1901.07028).

International audience