A Contextual Logical Framework
A new logical framework with explicit linear contexts and names is presented with the purpose of enabling direct and flexible manipulation of contexts, both for representing systems and meta-properties. The framework is a conservative extension of the logical framework LF, and builds on linear logic and contextual modal type theory. We prove that the framework admits canonical forms, and that it possesses all desirable meta-theoretic properties, in particular hereditary substitutions.
As proof of concept, we give an encoding of the one-sided sequent calculus for classical linear logic and the corresponding cut-admissibility proof, as well as an encoding of parallel reduction of lambda terms with the corresponding value-soundness proof.
KeywordsContext Variable Type Family Elimination Form Linear Logic Syntactic Category
We would like to thank Daniel Gustafsson for invaluable feedback. This work is funded by the DemTech grant 10-092309 of the Danish Council for Strategic Research on Democratic Technologies.
- 5.Pfenning, F., Cervesato, I.: A linear logical framework. In: Clarke, E. (ed.) 11th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science – LICS 1996, pp. 264–275. IEEE Computer Society Press, New Brunswick, 27–30 July 1996. This work appeared as Preprint 1834 of the Department of Mathematics of Technical University of Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- 7.Pientka, B.: A type-theoretic foundation for programming with higher-order abstract syntax and first-class substitutions. In: 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 2008), pp. 371–382. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
- 10.Poswolsky, A.: Functional Programming with Logical Frameworks: The Delphin Project. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University (2008)Google Scholar
- 11.Reed, J.: A hybrid logical framework. Ph.D. thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (2009)Google Scholar
- 12.Watkins, K., Cervesato, I., Pfenning, F., Walker, D.: A concurrent logical framework i: Judgments and properties. Technical report CMU-CS-02-101, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (2002)Google Scholar