Advertisement

Abstract

We characterise the polarised evaluation order through a categorical structure where the hypothesis that composition is associative is relaxed. Duploid is the name of the structure, as a reference to Jean-Louis Loday’s duplicial algebras. The main result is a reflection Open image in new window where Open image in new window is a category of duploids and duploid functors, and Open image in new window is the category of adjunctions and pseudo maps of adjunctions. The result suggests that the various biases in denotational semantics: indirect, call-by-value, call-by-name... are ways of hiding the fact that composition is not always associative.

Keywords

Natural Transformation Linear Logic Direct Model Denotational Semantic Lambda Calculus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Abramsky, S.: Sequentiality vs. concurrency in games and logic. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 13(4), 531–565 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ariola, Z.M., Herbelin, H.: Control Reduction Theories: the Benefit of Structural Substitution. Journal of Functional Programming 18(3), 373–419 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blass, A.: A game semantics for linear logic. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 56(1-3), 183–220 (1992)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Curien, P.L., Herbelin, H.: The duality of computation. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 35, 233–243 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Danos, V., Joinet, J.B., Schellinx, H.: A New Deconstructive Logic: Linear Logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62(3), 755–807 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Führmann, C.: Direct Models for the Computational Lambda Calculus. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 20, 245–292 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Girard, J.Y.: A new constructive logic: Classical logic. Math. Struct. Comp. Sci. 1(3), 255–296 (1991)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herbelin, H.: C’est maintenant qu’on calcule, au cœur de la dualité, Habilitation thesis (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jacobs, B.: Comprehension categories and the semantics of type dependency. Theor. Comput. Sci. 107(2), 169–207 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lafont, Y., Reus, B., Streicher, T.: Continuation Semantics or Expressing Implication by Negation. Technical report, University of Munich (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Laurent, O.: Etude de la polarisation en logique. Thèse de doctorat, Université Aix-Marseille II (March 2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laurent, O., Quatrini, M., Tortora de Falco, L.: Polarized and focalized linear and classical proofs. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 134(2-3), 217–264 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levy, P.B.: Call-by-Push-Value: A Subsuming Paradigm. In: Girard, J.-Y. (ed.) TLCA 1999. LNCS, vol. 1581, pp. 228–243. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Levy, P.B.: Adjunction models for call-by-push-value with stacks. In: Proc. Cat. Th. and Comp. Sci. ENTCS, vol. 69 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Loday, J.L.: Generalized bialgebras and triples of operads. arXiv preprint math/0611885 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Melliès, P.A.: Asynchronous Games 3 An Innocent Model of Linear Logic. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 122, 171–192 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Melliès, P.A., Tabareau, N.: Resource modalities in tensor logic. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 161(5), 632–653 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moggi, E.: Computational Lambda-Calculus and Monads. In: LICS (1989)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Munch-Maccagnoni, G.: Focalisation and classical realisability. In: Grädel, E., Kahle, R. (eds.) CSL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5771, pp. 409–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Munch-Maccagnoni, G.: Syntax and Models of a non-Associative Composition of Programs and Proofs. PhD thesis, Univ. Paris Diderot (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Murthy, C.R.: A Computational Analysis of Girard’s Translation and LC. In: LICS, pp. 90–101. IEEE Computer Society (1992)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Selinger, P.: Re: co-exponential question. Message to the Category Theory mailing list (July 1999), http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/1181
  23. 23.
    Selinger, P.: Control Categories and Duality: On the Categorical Semantics of the Lambda-Mu Calculus. Math. Struct in Comp. Sci. 11(2), 207–260 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thielecke, H.: Categorical Structure of Continuation Passing Style. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zeilberger, N.: On the unity of duality. Ann. Pure and App. Logic 153(1) (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guillaume Munch-Maccagnoni
    • 1
  1. 1.Sorbonne Paris Cité, PPS, UMR 7126 CNRS, PiR2, INRIA Paris-RocquencourtUniv Paris DiderotParisFrance

Personalised recommendations