semantics of pcf and the full abstraction problem
play

Semantics of PCF and the full abstraction problem Language, - PDF document

May 18, 2023 •133 likes •801 views

Semantics of PCF and the full abstraction problem Language, Operational Semantics and Models Luca Paolini paolini@di.unito.it Universit` a di Torino Dipartimento di Informatica August 28th September 1st Language 2 Types . . . . . . .

  1. Semantics of PCF and the full abstraction problem Language, Operational Semantics and Models Luca Paolini paolini@di.unito.it Universit` a di Torino Dipartimento di Informatica August 28th – September 1st Language 2 Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 λ -calculus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Free Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Renaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Syntax of PCF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 SOS 14 Evaluation of PCF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Recursion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Operational Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Syntactic Sugar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Models 19 PreModel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Basic Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Full Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Adequacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Complete Partial Order 25 FixPoint. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 CPO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 1

  2. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Standard Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Continuous function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 CPO Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 FixPoint. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Factorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Approximants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Computability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Domains 41 Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Scott-Domains 44 Compact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Algebraic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Bounded-Completeness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Arrow-Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Coherence Spaces 52 dI-Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Coherence Space. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Basic Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Stable Function. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Trace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Interpretation Revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 PCF+ 62 Two Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 PCF+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Full Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Definable Compact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Rank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Crisp Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Definability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Constructive Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Universality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 StPCF 72 Two Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 StPCF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 A Uniform Notation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Definable Cliques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Full Abstraction and Universality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Final Remarks 79 2

  3. Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Sequentiality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Higher-Order Computability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 References 83 3

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

NOMINAL GAME SEMANTICS PART II Andrzej Murawski UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD FULL ABSTRACTION J M 1 K

NOMINAL GAME SEMANTICS PART II Andrzej Murawski UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD FULL ABSTRACTION J M 1 K

NOMINAL GAME SEMANTICS PART II Andrzej Murawski UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD FULL ABSTRACTION J M 1 K = J M 2 K if and only if M 1 = M 2 f int int .f (0) + 1 : ( int int ) int ( int 2 int 1 ) int 0 O 0

762 views • 49 slides
Nominal Games and Full Abstraction for the Nu-Calculus Ian Stark Samson Abramsky, Dan Ghica

Nominal Games and Full Abstraction for the Nu-Calculus Ian Stark Samson Abramsky, Dan Ghica

Nominal Games and Full Abstraction for the Nu-Calculus Ian Stark Samson Abramsky, Dan Ghica Andrjez Murawski, Luke Ong School of Informatics Computing Laboratory The University of Edinburgh Oxford University Logic and Semantics club

539 views • 15 slides
Full Abstraction for Expressiveness: Past, Present and Future Daniele Gorla Sapienza

Full Abstraction for Expressiveness: Past, Present and Future Daniele Gorla Sapienza

Full Abstraction for Expressiveness: Past, Present and Future Daniele Gorla Sapienza ,Universit di Roma Bertinoro, June 18 th , 2014 Overview Absolute vs Relative Expressiveness (encodings) PAST Full abstraction:

664 views • 21 slides
Specification and Abstraction of Souvenir, Souvenir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Specification and Abstraction of Souvenir, Souvenir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Contents Specification and Abstraction of Souvenir, Souvenir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Specification and abstraction of semantics Semantics Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

280 views • 14 slides
What is abstraction? What is abstraction? Workable answer a blurring of details Idea:

What is abstraction? What is abstraction? Workable answer a blurring of details Idea:

What is abstraction? What is abstraction? Workable answer a blurring of details Idea: agree to ignore certain details ( for now ) e.g., with procedural abstraction idea is to convert original problem to a series of simpler

229 views • 12 slides
Bi-inductive Structural Semantics and its Abstraction Patrick Cousot cole normale

Bi-inductive Structural Semantics and its Abstraction Patrick Cousot cole normale

Bi-inductive Structural Semantics and its Abstraction Patrick Cousot cole normale suprieure 1. Motivation 45 rue dUlm, 75230 Paris cedex 05, France Patrick.Cousot@ens.fr www.di.ens.fr/~cousot (joint work with Radhia Cousot)

442 views • 18 slides
Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What

Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What

Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What is semantics? 2 / 21 What is the meaning of a program? Recall: aspects of a language syntax : the structure of its programs semantics : the

551 views • 21 slides
Point, Line, & Plane 1 Abstraction Abstraction is the act of considering something as a

Point, Line, & Plane 1 Abstraction Abstraction is the act of considering something as a

Point, Line, & Plane 1 Abstraction Abstraction is the act of considering something as a general quality or characteristic, apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances. 2 Abstraction Abstraction is

478 views • 21 slides
Specification and Abstraction of Semantics Patrick Cousot Radhia Cousot cole normale

Specification and Abstraction of Semantics Patrick Cousot Radhia Cousot cole normale

Specification and Abstraction of Semantics Patrick Cousot Radhia Cousot cole normale suprieure CNRS & cole polytechnique 45 rue dUlm Route de Saclay 75230 Paris cedex 05, France 91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France

417 views • 27 slides
Predicate Abstraction with SATABS Existential Abstraction Predicate Abstraction for Software

Predicate Abstraction with SATABS Existential Abstraction Predicate Abstraction for Software

Outline Introduction Predicate Abstraction with SATABS Existential Abstraction Predicate Abstraction for Software Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement Computing Existential Abstractions of Programs Version 1.0, 2010 Checking the

429 views • 12 slides
Data Abstraction Announcements Data Abstraction Data Abstraction Programmers Compound

Data Abstraction Announcements Data Abstraction Data Abstraction Programmers Compound

Data Abstraction Announcements Data Abstraction Data Abstraction Programmers Compound values combine other values together All A date: a year, a month, and a day A geographic position: latitude and longitude Data abstraction

430 views • 19 slides
Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management

Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management

Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management Many programs I would like to run What I want : a Thread Each program has full control of one or more CPUs 1 Abstraction Address Space is our

280 views • 7 slides
Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management

Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management

Abstraction is our Business What I have A single (or a finite number) of CPUs Memory Management Many programs I would like to run What I want : a Thread Each program has full control of one or more CPUs 1 2 Abstraction Address Space is our

368 views • 11 slides
Operational Semantics 1 / 14 Outline What is semantics? Operational Semantics What is

Operational Semantics 1 / 14 Outline What is semantics? Operational Semantics What is

Operational Semantics 1 / 14 Outline What is semantics? Operational Semantics What is semantics? 2 / 14 What is the meaning of a program? Recall: aspects of a language syntax : the structure of its programs semantics : the meaning of

588 views • 14 slides
Semantics so far in course Lexical Semantics, Distributions, Previous semantics lectures

Semantics so far in course Lexical Semantics, Distributions, Previous semantics lectures

11/13/18 Semantics so far in course Lexical Semantics, Distributions, Previous semantics lectures discussed Predicate-Argument Structure, and composing meanings of parts to produce the correct global sentence meaning Frame Semantic Parsing

460 views • 14 slides
CONSENSUS Fall 2012 Ken Birman Consensus a classic problem Consensus abstraction underlies

CONSENSUS Fall 2012 Ken Birman Consensus a classic problem Consensus abstraction underlies

IMPOSSIBILITY OF CONSENSUS Fall 2012 Ken Birman Consensus a classic problem Consensus abstraction underlies many distributed systems and protocols N processes They start execution with inputs {0,1} Asynchronous,

511 views • 35 slides
Guarded Traced Categories Sergey Goncharov and Lutz Schr oder Friedrich-Alexander-Universit

Guarded Traced Categories Sergey Goncharov and Lutz Schr oder Friedrich-Alexander-Universit

Guarded Traced Categories Sergey Goncharov and Lutz Schr oder Friedrich-Alexander-Universit at Erlangen-N urnberg FoSSaCS 2018, 16-19 April 2018, Thessaloniki, Greece Guarded Traced (Symmetric Monoidal) Categories Sergey Goncharov and

696 views • 34 slides
Guarded Traced Categories for Recursion and Iteration Sergey Goncharov a oder a and Paul Blain

Guarded Traced Categories for Recursion and Iteration Sergey Goncharov a oder a and Paul Blain

Guarded Traced Categories for Recursion and Iteration Sergey Goncharov a oder a and Paul Blain Levy b ) (joint ongoing work with Lutz Schr April 2, 2019, Reykjavik TCS Seminar a Friedrich-Alexander-Universit at Erlangen-N urnberg b

1.08k views • 54 slides
Nominal Sets and Dependent Type Theory Andrew Pitts Computer Laboratory 1/28 Plan

Nominal Sets and Dependent Type Theory Andrew Pitts Computer Laboratory 1/28 Plan

TYPES+PCC 2014 Nominal Sets and Dependent Type Theory Andrew Pitts Computer Laboratory 1/28 Plan Type Theory audience listens to talk presheaf categories 2/28 Plan nominal sets:

886 views • 64 slides
Nominal Sets and Functional Programming Andrew Pi tu s Computer Science & Technology FoPPS

Nominal Sets and Functional Programming Andrew Pi tu s Computer Science & Technology FoPPS

Nominal Sets and Functional Programming Andrew Pi tu s Computer Science & Technology FoPPS 2019 1/56 Nominal sets provide a mathematical theory of names based on some simple math to do with properties invariant under permuting names. 2/56

1.26k views • 113 slides
Recollecting Haskell, Part IV User Defined Types CIS 352 Programming Languages January 22, 2019

Recollecting Haskell, Part IV User Defined Types CIS 352 Programming Languages January 22, 2019

Recollecting Haskell, Part IV User Defined Types CIS 352 Programming Languages January 22, 2019 CIS 352 Algebraic Types 1 / 23 Enumerated Types, 1 Recall type synonyms: type Point = (Float,Float) -- A shorthand name for a type You also

418 views • 23 slides
Developing (Meta)Theory of -calculus in the Theory of Contexts Marino Miculan Universit` a

Developing (Meta)Theory of -calculus in the Theory of Contexts Marino Miculan Universit` a

Workshop MERLIN Siena, 18 June 2001 Developing (Meta)Theory of -calculus in the Theory of Contexts Marino Miculan Universit` a di Udine, Italy miculan@dimi.uniud.it A common scenario represent formally ( encode ) syntax and semantics

1.04k views • 35 slides
Category Theory Roy L. Crole University of Leicester, UK April 2015 MGS 2015, 7-11 April,

Category Theory Roy L. Crole University of Leicester, UK April 2015 MGS 2015, 7-11 April,

Category Theory Roy L. Crole University of Leicester, UK April 2015 MGS 2015, 7-11 April, University of Sheffield, UK 1/39 Introductory Remarks Category Theory is a theory of abstraction (of algebraic structure). It had its origins in

1.02k views • 84 slides
Teaching & Learning During Covid-19: How Washington Schools are Planning for Fall #WAedu

Teaching & Learning During Covid-19: How Washington Schools are Planning for Fall #WAedu

Teaching & Learning During Covid-19: How Washington Schools are Planning for Fall #WAedu #WAdistancelearning Norms Everyone is on mute, but we want to hear from you! Use Q&A at any time for questions and comments. Only panelists will

602 views • 46 slides

More recommend