We construct a realizability model of linear dependent type theory from a linear combinatory algebra. Our model motivates a number of additions to the type theory. In particular, we add a universe with two decoding operations: one takes codes to cartesian types and the other takes codes to linear types. The universe is impredicative in the sense that it is closed under both large cartesian dependent products and large linear dependent products. We also add a rule for injectivity of the modality turning linear terms into cartesian terms. With all of the additions, we are able to encode (linear) inductive types. As a case study, we consider the type of lists over a linear type, and demonstrate that our encoding has the relevant uniqueness principle. The construction of the realizability model is fully formalized in the proof assistant Rocq.

We explore a kind of first-order predicate logic with intended semantics in the reals. Compared to other approaches in the literature, we work predominantly in the multiplicative reals $[0,\infty ]$, showing they support three generations of connectives, that we call non-linear, linear additive, and linear multiplicative. Means and harmonic means emerge as natural candidates for bounded existential and universal quantifiers, and in fact we see they behave as expected in relation to the other logical connectives. We explain this fact through the well-known fact that min/max and arithmetic mean/harmonic mean sit at opposite ends of a spectrum, that of p-means. We give syntax and semantics for this quantitative predicate logic, and as example applications, we show how softmax is the quantitative semantics of argmax, and Rényi entropy/Hill numbers are additive/multiplicative semantics of the same formula. Indeed, the additive reals also fit into the story by exploiting the Napierian duality $-log⊣1/exp$, which highlights a formal distinction between ‘additive’ and ‘multiplicative’ quantities. Finally, we describe two attempts at a categorical semantics via enriched hyperdoctrines. We discuss why hyperdoctrines are in fact probably inadequate for this kind of logic.

We present a domain-specific type theory for constructions and proofs in category theory. The type theory axiomatizes notions of category, functor, profunctor and a generalized form of natural transformations. The type theory imposes an ordered linear restriction on standard predicate logic, which guarantees that all functions between categories are functorial, all relations are profunctorial, and all transformations are natural by construction, with no separate proofs necessary. Important category-theoretic proofs such as the Yoneda lemma and Co-yoneda lemma become simple type-theoretic proofs about the relationship between unit, tensor and (ordered) function types, and can be seen to be ordered refinements of theorems in predicate logic. The type theory is sound and complete for a categorical model in virtual equipments, which model both internal and enriched category theory. While the proofs in our type theory look like standard set-based arguments, the syntactic discipline ensure that all proofs and constructions carry over to enriched and internal settings as well.

Most interaction with a computer is via graphical user interfaces. These are traditionally implemented imperatively, using shared mutable state and callbacks. This is efficient, but is also difficult to reason about and error prone. Functional Reactive Programming (FRP) provides an elegant alternative which allows GUIs to be designed in a declarative fashion. However, most FRP languages are synchronous and continually check for new data. This means that an FRP-style GUI will “wake up” on each program cycle. This is problematic for applications like text editors and browsers, where often nothing happens for extended periods of time, and we want the implementation to sleep until new data arrives. In this paper, we present an asynchronous FRP language for designing GUIs called ${𝜆}_{\text{𝖶𝗂𝖽𝗀𝖾𝗍}}$. Our language provides a novel semantics for widgets, the building block of GUIs, which offers both a natural Curry–Howard logical interpretation and an efficient implementation strategy.

Any refinement system (= functor) has a fully faithful representation in the refinement system of presheaves, by interpreting types as relative slice categories, and refinement types as presheaves over those categories. Motivated by an analogy between side effects in programming and context effects in linear logic, we study logical aspects of this ‘positive’ (covariant) representation, as well as of an associated ‘negative’ (contravariant) representation. We establish several preservation properties for these representations, including a generalization of Day’s embedding theorem for monoidal closed categories. Then, we establish that the positive and negative representations satisfy an Isbell-style duality. As corollaries, we derive two different formulas for the positive representation of a pushforward (inspired by the classical negative translations of proof theory), which express it either as the dual of a pullback of a dual or as the double dual of a pushforward. Besides explaining how these constructions on refinement systems generalize familiar category-theoretic ones (by viewing categories as special refinement systems), our main running examples involve representations of Hoare logic and linear sequent calculus.

We provide a categorical framework for models of a type theory that has special types for physical quantities. The types are indexed by the physical dimensions that they involve. Fibrations are used to organize this index structure in the models of the type theory. We develop some informative models of this type theory: firstly, a model based on group actions, which captures invariance under scaling, and secondly, a way of constructing new models using relational parametricity.

The standard reading of type theory through the lens of category theory is based on the idea of viewing a type system as a category of well-typed terms. We propose a basic revision of this reading: rather than interpreting type systems as categories, we describe them as functors from a category of typing derivations to a category of underlying terms. Then, turning this around, we explain how in fact any functor gives rise to a generalized type system, with an abstract notion of typing judgment, typing derivations and typing rules. This leads to a purely categorical reformulation of various natural classes of type systems as natural classes of functors.

The main purpose of this paper is to describe the general framework (which can also be seen as providing a categorical analysis of refinement types), and to present a few applications. As a larger case study, we revisit Reynolds’ paper on “The Meaning of Types” (2000), showing how the paper’s main results may be reconstructed along these lines.

The concept of refinement in type theory is a way of reconciling the “intrinsic” and the “extrinsic” meanings of types. We begin with a rigorous analysis of this concept, settling on the simple conclusion that the type-theoretic notion of “type refinement system” may be identified with the category-theoretic notion of “functor”. We then use this correspondence to give an equivalent type-theoretic formulation of Grothendieck’s definition of (bi)fibration, and extend this to a definition of monoidal closed bifibrations, which we see as a natural space in which to study the properties of proofs and programs. Our main result is a representation theorem for strong monads on a monoidal closed fibration, describing sufficient conditions for a monad to be isomorphic to a continuations monad “up to pullback”.

We present a precise correspondence between separation logic and a simple notion of predicate BI, extending the earlier correspondence given between part of separation logic and propositional BI. Moreover, we introduce the notion of a BI hyperdoctrine, show that it soundly models classical and intuitionistic first- and higher-order predicate BI, and use it to show that we may easily extend separation logic to higher-order . We also demonstrate that this extension is important for program proving, since it provides sound reasoning principles for data abstraction in the presence of aliasing.