Substructural type systems provide the ability to speak about resources . By enforcing usage restrictions on inputs to computations they allow programmers to reify limited system units–such as memory–in types. We demonstrate a new form of resource reasoning founded on constraining outputs and explore its utility for practical programming. In particular, we identify a number of disparate programming features explored largely in the security literature as various fragments of our unified framework. These encompass capabilities, quantitative information leakage, sandboxing in the style of the Linux seccomp interface, authorization protocols, and more. We furthermore explore its connection to conventional input-based resource reasoning, casting it as an internal treatment of the constructive Kripke semantics of substructural logics. We verify the capability, quantity, and protocol safety of our system through a single logical relations argument. In doing so, we take the first steps towards obtaining the ultimate multitool for security reasoning.

Ordered logics and type systems have been used in a variety of applications including computational linguistics, memory allocation, stream processing, logical frameworks, parametricity, and enforcing security protocols. In most formulations, ordered types are also linear, requiring each resource to be used exactly once. Prior work by Kanovich et al. has investigated calculi that relax this constraint through subexponentials within a linear ordered logic. We generalize their work by using adjoint modalities to combine logics with varying fine-grained structural properties, including weakening, left contraction, right contraction, left mobility, and right mobility. We show that the resulting sequent calculus admits cut elimination. We further provide a natural deduction formulation in which structural rules are implicit, and show that proof checking for this system is decidable. This makes it a suitable foundation for an expressive adjoint programming language or logical framework.

Information flow control is a long-studied approach for establishing non-interference properties of programs. For instance, it can be used to prove that a secret does not interfere with some computation, thereby establishing that the former does not leak through the latter. Despite their potential as a holy grail for security reasoning and their maturity within the literature, information flow type systems have seen limited adoption. In practice, information flow specifications tend to be excessively complex and can easily spiral out of control even for simple programs. Additionally, while non-interference is well-behaved in an idealized setting where information leakage never occurs, most practical programs must violate non-interference in order to fulfill their purpose. Useful information flow type systems in prior work must therefore contend with a definition of non-interference extended with declassification, which often offers weaker modular reasoning properties. We introduce structural information flow, which both illuminates and addresses these issues from a logical viewpoint. In particular, we draw on established insights from the modal logic literature to argue that information flow reasoning arises from hybrid logic, rather than conventional modal logic as previously imagined. We show with a range of examples that structural information flow specifications are straightforward to write and easy to visually parse. Uniquely in the structural setting, we demonstrate that declassification emerges not as an aberration to non-interference, but as a natural and unavoidable consequence of sufficiently general machinery for information flow. This flavor of declassification features excellent local reasoning and enables our approach to account for real-world information flow needs without compromising its theoretical elegance. Finally, we establish non-interference via a logical relations approach, showing off its simplicity in the face of the expressive power captured.

Ordered, linear, and other substructural type systems allow us to expose deep properties of programs at the syntactic level of types. In this paper, we develop a family of unary logical relations that allow us to prove consequences of parametricity for a range of substructural type systems. A key idea is to parameterize the relation by an algebra, which we exemplify with a monoid and commutative monoid to interpret ordered and linear type systems, respectively. We prove the fundamental theorem of logical relations and apply it to deduce extensional properties of inhabitants of certain types. Examples include demonstrating that the ordered types for list append and reversal are inhabited by exactly one function, as are types of some tree traversals. Similarly, the linear type of the identity function on lists is inhabited only by permutations of the input. Our most advanced example shows that the ordered type of the list fold function is inhabited only by the fold function.

Higher-order unification has been shown to be undecidable. Miller discovered the pattern fragment and subsequently showed that higher-order pattern unification is decidable and has most general unifiers. We extend the algorithm to higher-order rational terms (a.k.a. regular Böhm trees, a form of cyclic λ-terms) and show that pattern unification on higher-order rational terms is decidable and has most general unifiers. We prove the soundness and completeness of the algorithm.

We study the interaction of structural subtyping with parametric polymorphism and recursively defined type constructors. Although structural subtyping is undecidable in this setting, we describe a notion of parametricity for type constructors and then exploit it to define parametric subtyping , a conceptually simple, decidable, and expressive fragment of structural subtyping that strictly generalizes rigid subtyping . We present and prove correct an effective saturation-based decision procedure for parametric subtyping, demonstrating its applicability using a variety of examples. We also provide an implementation of this decision procedure as an artifact.

Adjoint logic is a general approach to combining multiple logics with different structural properties, including linear, affine, strict, and (ordinary) intuitionistic logics, where each proposition has an intrinsic mode of truth. It has been defined in the form of a sequent calculus because the central concept of independence is most clearly understood in this form, and because it permits a proof of cut elimination following standard techniques. In this paper we present a natural deduction formulation of adjoint logic and show how it is related to the sequent calculus. As a consequence, every provable proposition has a verification (sometimes called a long normal form). We also give a computational interpretation of adjoint logic in the form of a functional language and prove properties of computations that derive from the structure of modes, including freedom from garbage (for modes without weakening and contraction), strictness (for modes disallowing weakening), and erasure (based on a preorder between modes). Finally, we present a surprisingly subtle algorithm for type checking.

Type refinements combine the compositionality of typechecking with the expressivity of program logics, offering a synergistic approach to program verification. In this paper we apply dependent type refinements to SAX, a futures-based process calculus that arises from the Curry-Howard interpretation of the intuitionistic semi-axiomatic sequent calculus and includes unrestricted recursion both at the level of types and processes. With our type refinement system, we can reason about the partial correctness of SAX programs, complementing prior work on sized type refinements that supports reasoning about termination. Our design regime synthesizes the infinitary proof theory of SAX with that of bidirectional typing and Hoare logic, deriving some standard reasoning principles for data and (co)recursion while enabling information hiding for codata. We prove syntactic type soundness, which entails a notion of partial correctness that respects codata encapsulation. We illustrate our language through a few simple examples.

The specifics of data layout can be important for the efficiency of functional programs and interaction with external libraries. In this paper, we develop a type-theoretic approach to data layout that could be used as a typed intermediate language in a compiler or to give a programmer more control. Our starting point is a computational interpretation of the semi-axiomatic sequent calculus for intuitionistic logic that defines abstract notions of cells and addresses. We refine this semantics so addresses have more structure to reflect possible alternative layouts without fundamentally departing from intuitionistic logic. We then add recursive types and explore example programs and properties of the resulting language.

Logical frameworks provide natural and direct ways of specifying and reasoning within deductive systems. The logical framework LF and subsequent developments focus on finitary proof systems, making the formalization of circular proof systems in such logical frameworks a cumbersome and awkward task. To address this issue, we propose CoLF, a conservative extension of LF with higher-order rational terms and mixed inductive and coinductive definitions. In this framework, two terms are equal if they unfold to the same infinite regular Böhm tree. Both term equality and type checking are decidable in CoLF. We illustrate the elegance and expressive power of the framework with several small case studies.