Studia Logica

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 417–448 | Cite as

Lambda Calculus and Intuitionistic Linear Logic

  • Simona Ronchi della Rocca
  • Luca Roversi


The introduction of Linear Logic extends the Curry-Howard Isomorphism to intensional aspects of the typed functional programming. In particular, every formula of Linear Logic tells whether the term it is a type for, can be either erased/duplicated or not, during a computation. So, Linear Logic can be seen as a model of a computational environment with an explicit control about the management of resources.

This paper introduces a typed functional language Λ! and a categorical model for it.

The terms of Λ! encode a version of natural deduction for Intuitionistic Linear Logic such that linear and non linear assumptions are managed multiplicatively and additively, respectively. Correspondingly, the terms of Λ! are built out of two disjoint sets of variables. Moreover, the λ-abstractions of Λ! bind variables and patterns. The use of two different kinds of variables and the patterns allow a very compact definition of the one-step operational semantics of Λ!, unlike all other extensions of Curry-Howard Isomorphism to Intuitionistic Linear Logic. The language Λ! is Church-Rosser and enjoys both Strong Normalizability and Subject Reduction.

The categorical model induces operational equivalences like, for example, a set of extensional equivalences.

The paper presents also an untyped version of Λ! and a type assignment for it, using formulas of Linear Logic as types. The type assignment inherits from Λ! all the good computational properties and enjoys also the Principal-Type Property.

linear logic Curry-Howard isomorphism typed λ-calculi 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. Abramsky, 1990, Computational interpretation of linear logic, Technical Report 90/92, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Abramsky and R. Jagadeesan, 1992, Games and full completeness for multiplicative linear logic, Technical Report 92/24, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, September.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    H.P. Barendregt, 1984, The Lambda Calculus, North-Holland, second edition.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    N. Benton, G. Bierman, V. de Paiva, and M. Hyland, 1990, Term assignment for intuitionistic linear logic. Technical Report 262, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, August.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    V. Breazu-Tannen, D. Kesner, and L. Puel, 1993, A typed pattern calculus, In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Logic in Computer Science LICS'93 (Montreal), pages 262–274, June.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Gallier, 1990, Logic and Computer Science, chapter On Girard's “candidats de reductibilités”, pages 123–203, P. Odifreddi editor, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Gallier, 1993, On the correspondence between proofs and lambda terms, Obtained by ftp, January.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.Y. Girard, 1972, Interpretation Fonctionelle et Elimination des Coupures de l'Arithmetique d'Ordre Superieur, PhD thesis, Université Paris VII.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.Y. Girard, 1987, Linear logic Theoretical Computer Science, 50:1–102.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    J.Y. Girard, Y. Lafont, and P. Taylor, 1989, Proofs and Types, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. Huet, 1980, Confluent reductions: abstract properties and applications to term rewriting systems, Journal of A.C.M., 27:797–821.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    B. Jacobs, 1992, Semantics of weakening and contraction, In Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications TLCA'92, volume LNGS. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Y. Lafont, 1988, The linear abstract machine, Theoretical Computer Science, 59:157–180.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    P. Lincoln and J. Mitchell, 1992, Operational aspects of linear lambda calculus, In Proceedings of Symposium on Logic in Computer Science LICS'92, pages 235–246, June.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Simone Martini and Andrea Masini, 1993, On the fine structure of the exponential rule. In J.-Y. Girard, Y. Lafont, and L. Regnier, editors, Advances in Linear Logic, pages 197–210. Cambridge University Press, 1995. Proceedings of the Workshop on Linear Logic, Ithaca, New York, June.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    G. Mints, Normal deductions in the intuitionistic linear logic. To appear in Archive for Mathematical Logic.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Pravato and L. Roversi, 1995, A! considered both as a paradigmatic language and as a meta-language, In Theoretical Computer Science: Proceedings of the Fifth Italian Conference (Salerno), pages 146–161. World Scientific, November.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    D. Prawitz, 1965. Natural Deduction, a Proof Theoretic Study, Almquist and Wiksell-Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    J.A. Reynolds, 1974, Paris Colloquium on Programming, chapter Towards a Theory of Type Structures, pages 408–425. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    S. Ronchi della Rocca and L. Roversi 1994, Lambda calculus and intuitionistic linear logic, Invited talk at the Logic Colloquium'94 (Clermont-Ferrand), July.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    L. Roversi, 1996, Curry-Howard isomorphism and intuitionistic linear logic, Technical Report 19/96, Università degli Studi di Torino.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    A.S. Troelstra, 1992, Lectures on Linear Logic, CSLI.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    P. Wadler, 1993 A syntax for linear logic, Presented at the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, New Orleans, April.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simona Ronchi della Rocca
    • 1
  • Luca Roversi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli studi di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations