SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 0905.0354

A completeness result for a realisability semantics for an intersection type system

Abstract

In this paper we consider a type system with a universal type $ω$ where any term (whether open or closed, $β$-normalising or not) has type $ω$. We provide this type system with a realisability semantics where an atomic type is interpreted as the set of $λ$-terms saturated by a certain relation. The variation of the saturation relation gives a number of interpretations to each type. We show the soundness and completeness of our semantics and that for different notions of saturation (based on weak head reduction and normal $β$-reduction) we obtain the same interpretation for types. Since the presence of $ω$ prevents typability and realisability from coinciding and creates extra difficulties in characterizing the interpretation of a type, we define a class ${\mathbb U}^+$ of the so-called positive types (where $ω$ can only occur at specific positions). We show that if a term inhabits a positive type, then this term is $β$-normalisable and reduces to a closed term. In other words, positive types can be used to represent abstract data types. The completeness theorem for ${\mathbb U}^+$ becomes interesting indeed since it establishes a perfect equivalence between typable terms and terms that inhabit a type. In other words, typability and realisability coincide on ${\mathbb U}^+$. We give a number of examples to explain the intuition behind the definition of ${\mathbb U}^+$ and to show that this class cannot be extended while keeping its desired properties.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Fairouz Kamareddine, Karim Nour. 2009-05-04. A completeness result for a realisability semantics for an intersection type system. https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.0354

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO