Taming Modal Impredicativity: Superlazy Reduction
Pure, or type-free, Linear Logic proof nets are Turing complete once cut-elimination is considered as computation. We introduce modal impredicativity as a new form of impredicativity causing cut-elimination to be problematic from a complexity point of view. Modal impredicativity occurs when, during reduction, the conclusion of a residual of a box b interacts with a node that belongs to the proof net inside another residual of b. Technically speaking, superlazy reduction is a new notion of reduction that allows to control modal impredicativity. More specifically, superlazy reduction replicates a box only when all its copies are opened. This makes the overall cost of reducing a proof net finite and predictable. Specifically, superlazy reduction applied to any pure proof nets takes primitive recursive time. Moreover, any primitive recursive function can be computed by a pure proof net via superlazy reduction.
KeywordsLinear logic implicit computational complexity proof theory
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Dal Lago, U.: The geometry of linear higher-order recursion. In: Proc. 20th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 366–375. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Dal Lago, U., Roversi, L., Vercelli, L.: Taming modal impredicativity: Superlazy reduction. Extended Version (2008), http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.2891
- 5.Girard, J.-Y.: Geometry of interaction 1: interpretation of system F. In: Proc. Logic Colloquium 1988, pp. 221–260 (1989)Google Scholar
- 7.Hofmann, M.: Linear types and non-size-increasing polynomial time computation. In: Proceedings of the 14th Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 464–473. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
- 9.Leivant, D.: Stratified functional programs and computational complexity. In: Proceedings of 20th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 325–333 (1993)Google Scholar