The logical principles of focalisation and polarisation can be used to design well-behaved term syntaxes for sequent calculus, which play a role as meta-languages for describing effectful computation. On the semantics side, this corresponds to an axiomatic and polarised notion of model of computation stated in terms of adjunctions over non-associative categories. In this paper, we study the special and delicate cases of resource and effect modalities in a general intuitionistic and linear setting: an exponential comonad $!$ (refining $\square$) and a strong monad $◊$. The starting point of our contribution is noticing that the completeness for a polarised syntax for $!$ and $◊$ with respect to (co)monads in linear call-by-push-value models can be achieved if we move to relative (co)monads: more precisely, comonads relative to $\downarrow$ (the positive shift functor) for $!$ and monads relative to $\uparrow$ (the negative shift functor) for $◊$. These specialisations of the concept of relative (co)monad to call-by-push-value adjunctions recently appeared. Yet the syntax we present arose from proof-theoretic consideration, without the link with relative (co)monads being noticed at the time. Our first remark is thus that (co)monads relative to a call-by-push-value adjunction have been motivated previously from a proof-theoretic perspective in the context of focalisation, which also provides a meta-language for these concepts in an effectful setting. We carry out the study of these modalities from the axiomatic, non-associative point of view. We recall the notion of adjunction over non-associative categories, and establish correspondence results between this notion of adjunction and that of relative adjunction. This correspondence is then extended to linear-non-linear and strong versions of adjunctions as needed to model $!$ and $◊$.

Levy’s call-by-push-value (CBPV) is a language that subsumes both call-by-name and call-by-value lambda calculi by syntactically distinguishing values from computations and explicitly specifying execution order. This low-level handling of computation suspension and resumption makes CBPV suitable as a compiler intermediate representation (IR), while its substitution evaluation semantics affords compositional reasoning about programs. In particular, βη -equivalences in CBPV have been used to justify compiler optimizations in low-level IRs. However, these equivalences do not validate commuting conversions , which are key transformations in compiler passes such as A-normalization. Such transformations syntactically rearrange computations without affecting evaluation order, and can reveal new opportunities for inlining. In this work, we identify the commuting conversions of CBPV, define a commuting conversion normal form (CCNF) for CBPV, present a single-pass transformation into CCNF based on A-normalization, and prove that well-typed, translated programs evaluate to the same result. To avoid the usual code duplication issues that also arise with A-normal form, we adapt the explicit join point constructs by Maurer et al. [2017] . Our results are all mechanized in Lean 4.

In the spirit of the Curry-Howard correspondence between proofs and programs, we define and study a syntax and semantics for classical logic equipped with a computationally involutive negation, using a polarised effect calculus, the linear classical L -calculus. A main challenge in designing a denotational semantics for the calculus is to accommodate both call-by-value and call-by-name evaluation strategies, which leads to a failure of associativity of composition. In order to tackle this issue, we define a notion of adjunction between graph morphisms on non-associative categories, which we use to formulate polarized and non-associative notions of symmetric monoidal closed duploid and of dialogue duploid. We show that they provide a direct style counterpart to adjunction models: linear effect adjunctions for the (linear) call-by-push-value calculus and dialogue chiralities for linear continuations, respectively. In particular, we show that the syntax of the linear classical L -calculus can be interpreted in any dialogue duploid, and that it defines in fact a syntactic dialogue duploid. As an application, we establish, by semantic as well as syntactic means, the Hasegawa-Thielecke theorem, which states that the notions of central map and of thunkable map coincide in any dialogue duploid (in particular, for any double negation monad on a symmetric monoidal category).

Categorical gluing is a powerful technique for proving meta-theorems of type theories such as canonicity and normalization. Synthetic Tait Computability (STC) provides an abstract treatment of the complex gluing models by internalizing the gluing category into a modal dependent type theory with a phase distinction. This work presents a mechanization of STC in the Istari proof assistant. Istari is a Martin-Löf-style extensional type theory with equality reflection, which avoids much of the explicit transport reasoning typically found in intensional proof assistants. This work develops a reusable library for synthetic phase distinction, including modalities, extension types, and strict glue types, and applies it to two case studies: (1) a canonicity model for dependent type theory with dependent products and booleans with large elimination, and (2) a Kripke canonicity model for the cost-aware logical framework. Our results demonstrate that the core STC constructions can be formalized essentially verbatim in Istari, preserving the elegance of the on-paper arguments while ensuring machine-checked correctness.

We adapt Fiore, Plotkin, and Turi’s treatment of abstract syntax with binding, substitution, and holes to account for languages with second-class sorts. These situations include programming calculi such as the Call-by-Value lambda-calculus (CBV) and Levy’s Call-by-Push-Value (CBPV). Prohibiting second-class sorts from appearing in variable contexts changes the characterisation of the abstract syntax from monoids in monoidal categories to actions in actegories. We reproduce much of the development through bicategorical arguments. We apply the resulting theory by proving substitution lemmata for varieties of CBV.

We give a denotational account of logical relations for call-by-push-value (CBPV) in the fibrational style of Hermida, Jacobs, Katsumata and others. Fibrations – which axiomatise the usual notion of sets-with-relations – provide a clean framework for constructing new, logical relations-style, models. Such models can then be used to study properties such as effect simulation.

Extending this picture to CBPV is challenging: the models incorporate both adjunctions and enrichment, making the appropriate notion of fibration unclear. We handle this using 2-category theory. We identify an appropriate 2-category, and define CBPV fibrations to be fibrations internal to this 2-category which strictly preserve the CBPV semantics.

Next, we develop the theory so it parallels the classical setting. We give versions of the codomain and subobject fibrations, and show that new models can be constructed from old ones by pullback. The resulting framework enables the construction of new, logical relations-style, models for CBPV.

Finally, we demonstrate the utility of our approach with particular examples. These include a generalisation of Katsumata’s $\top \top$-lifting to CBPV models, an effect simulation result, and a relative full completeness result for CBPV without sum types.

We study a cost-aware programming language for higher-order recursion dubbed ${\text{𝐏𝐂𝐅}}_{\text{𝖼𝗈𝗌𝗍}}$ in the setting of synthetic domain theory (SDT). Our main contribution relates the denotational cost semantics of ${\text{𝐏𝐂𝐅}}_{\text{𝖼𝗈𝗌𝗍}}$ to its computational cost semantics, a new kind of dynamic semantics for program execution that serves as a mathematically natural alternative to operational semantics in SDT. In particular we prove an internal, cost-sensitive version of Plotkin’s computational adequacy theorem, giving a precise correspondence between the denotational and computational semantics for complete programs at base type. The constructions and proofs of this paper take place in the internal dependent type theory of an SDT topos extended by a phase distinction in the sense of Sterling and Harper. By controlling the interpretation of cost structure via the phase distinction in the denotational semantics, we show that ${\text{𝐏𝐂𝐅}}_{\text{𝖼𝗈𝗌𝗍}}$ programs also evince a noninterference property of cost and behavior. We verify the axioms of the type theory by means of a model construction based on relative sheaf models of SDT.

We present decalf , a d irected, e ffectful c ost- a ware l ogical f ramework for studying quantitative aspects of functional programs with effects. Like calf , the language is based on a formal phase distinction between the extension and the intension of a program, its pure behavior as distinct from its cost measured by an effectful step-counting primitive. The type theory ensures that the behavior is unaffected by the cost accounting. Unlike calf , the present language takes account of effects , such as probabilistic choice and mutable state. This extension requires a reformulation of calf ’s approach to cost accounting: rather than rely on a “separable” notion of cost, here a cost bound is simply another program . To make this formal, we equip every type with an intrinsic preorder, relaxing the precise cost accounting intrinsic to a program to a looser but nevertheless informative estimate. For example, the cost bound of a probabilistic program is itself a probabilistic program that specifies the distribution of costs. This approach serves as a streamlined alternative to the standard method of isolating a cost recurrence and readily extends to higher-order, effectful programs. The development proceeds by first introducing the decalf type system, which is based on an intrinsic ordering among terms that restricts in the extensional phase to extensional equality, but in the intensional phase reflects an approximation of the cost of a program of interest. This formulation is then applied to a number of illustrative examples, including pure and effectful sorting algorithms, simple probabilistic programs, and higher-order functions. Finally, we justify decalf via a model in the topos of augmented simplicial sets.

We develop a denotational semantics for general reference types in an impredicative version of guarded homotopy type theory, an adaptation of synthetic guarded domain theory to Voevodsky’s univalent foundations. We observe for the first time the profound impact of univalence on the denotational semantics of mutable state. Univalence automatically ensures that all computations are invariant under symmetries of the heap - a bountiful source of program equivalences. In particular, even the most simplistic univalent model enjoys many new equations that do not hold when the same constructions are carried out in the universes of traditional set-level (extensional) type theory.

We define and study LNL polycategories, which abstract the judgmental structure of classical linear logic with exponentials. Many existing structures can be represented as LNL polycategories, including LNL adjunctions, linear exponential comonads, LNL multicategories, IL-indexed categories, linearly distributive categories with storage, commutative and strong monads, CBPV-structures, models of polarized calculi, Freyd-categories, and skew multicategories, as well as ordinary cartesian, symmetric, and planar multicategories and monoidal categories, symmetric polycategories, and linearly distributive and *-autonomous categories. To study such classes of structures uniformly, we define a notion of LNL doctrine, such that each of these classes of structures can be identified with the algebras for some such doctrine. We show that free algebras for LNL doctrines can be presented by a sequent calculus, and that every morphism of doctrines induces an adjunction between their 2-categories of algebras.

We present calf, a cost-aware logical framework for studying quantitative aspects of functional programs. Taking inspiration from recent work that reconstructs traditional aspects of programming languages in terms of a modal account of phase distinctions, we argue that the cost structure of programs motivates a phase distinction between intension and extension. Armed with this technology, we contribute a synthetic account of cost structure as a computational effect in which cost-aware programs enjoy an internal noninterference property: input/output behavior cannot depend on cost. As a full-spectrum dependent type theory, calf presents a unified language for programming and specification of both cost and behavior that can be integrated smoothly with existing mathematical libraries available in type theoretic proof assistants. We evaluate calf as a general framework for cost analysis by implementing two fundamental techniques for algorithm analysis: the method of recurrence relations and physicist’s method for amortized analysis. We deploy these techniques on a variety of case studies: we prove a tight, closed bound for Euclid’s algorithm, verify the amortized complexity of batched queues, and derive tight, closed bounds for the sequential and parallel complexity of merge sort, all fully mechanized in the Agda proof assistant. Lastly we substantiate the soundness of quantitative reasoning in calf by means of a model construction.

Algebraic effects offer a versatile framework that covers a wide variety of effects. However, the family of operations that delimit scopes are not algebraic and are usually modelled as handlers, thus preventing them from being used freely in conjunction with algebraic operations. Although proposals for scoped operations exist, they are either ad-hoc and unprincipled, or too inconvenient for practical programming. This paper provides the best of both worlds: a theoretically-founded model of scoped effects that is convenient for implementation and reasoning. Our new model is based on an adjunction between a locally finitely presentable category and a category of functorial algebras . Using comparison functors between adjunctions, we show that our new model, an existing indexed model, and a third approach that simulates scoped operations in terms of algebraic ones have equal expressivity for handling scoped operations. We consider our new model to be the sweet spot between ease of implementation and structuredness. Additionally, our approach automatically induces fusion laws of handlers of scoped effects, which are useful for reasoning and optimisation.

The theory of program modules is of interest to language designers not only for its practical importance to programming, but also because it lies at the nexus of three fundamental concerns in language design: the phase distinction, computational effects, and type abstraction. We contribute a fresh “synthetic” take on program modules that treats modules as the fundamental constructs, in which the usual suspects of prior module calculi (kinds, constructors, dynamic programs) are rendered as derived notions in terms of a modal type-theoretic account of the phase distinction. We simplify the account of type abstraction (embodied in the generativity of module functors) through a lax modality that encapsulates computational effects, placing projectibility of module expressions on a type-theoretic basis.

Our main result is a (significant) proof-relevant and phase-sensitive generalization of the Reynolds abstraction theorem for a calculus of program modules, based on a new kind of logical relation called a parametricity structure. Parametricity structures generalize the proof-irrelevant relations of classical parametricity to proof-relevant families, where there may be non-trivial evidence witnessing the relatedness of two programs—simplifying the metatheory of strong sums over the collection of types, for although there can be no “relation classifying relations,” one easily accommodates a “family classifying small families.”

Using the insight that logical relations/parametricity is itself a form of phase distinction between the syntactic and the semantic, we contribute a new synthetic approach to phase separated parametricity based on the slogan logical relations as types, by iterating our modal account of the phase distinction. We axiomatize a dependent type theory of parametricity structures using two pairs of complementary modalities (syntactic, semantic) and (static, dynamic), substantiated using the topos theoretic Artin gluing construction. Then, to construct a simulation between two implementations of an abstract type, one simply programs a third implementation whose type component carries the representation invariant.

Gradually typed languages are designed to support both dynamically typed and statically typed programming styles while preserving the benefits of each. Sound gradually typed languages dynamically check types at runtime at the boundary between statically typed and dynamically typed modules. However, there is much disagreement in the gradual typing literature over how to enforce complex types such as tuples, lists, functions and objects. In this paper, we propose a new perspective on the design of runtime gradual type enforcement: runtime type casts exist precisely to ensure the correctness of certain type-based refactorings and optimizations. For instance, for simple types, a language designer might desire that beta-eta equality is valid. We show that this perspective is useful by demonstrating that a cast semantics can be derived from beta-eta equality. We do this by providing an axiomatic account program equivalence in a gradual cast calculus in a logic we call gradual type theory (GTT). Based on Levy’s call-by-push-value, GTT allows us to axiomatize both call-by-value and call-by-name gradual languages. We then show that we can derive the behavior of casts for simple types from the corresponding eta equality principle and the assumption that the language satisfies a property called graduality, also known as the dynamic gradual guarantee. Since we can derive the semantics from the assumption of eta equality, we also receive a useful contrapositive: any observably different cast semantics that satisfies graduality must violate the eta equality. We show the consistency and applicability of our axiomatic theory by proving that a contract-based implementation using the lazy cast semantics gives a logical relations model of our type theory, where equivalence in GTT implies contextual equivalence of the programs. Since GTT also axiomatizes the dynamic gradual guarantee, our model also establishes this central theorem of gradual typing. The model is parameterized by the implementation of the dynamic types, and so gives a family of implementations that validate type-based optimization and the gradual guarantee.

Gradually typed programming languages provide a way forward in the debate between static and dynamic typing. In a gradual language, statically typed and dynamically typed programs can intermingle, and dynamically typed scripts can be gradually migrated to a statically typed style. In a sound gradually typed language, static type information is just as reliable as in a static language, establishing correctness of type-based refactoring and optimization. To ensure this in the presence of dynamic typing, runtime type casts are inserted automatically at the boundary between static and dynamic code. However the design of these languages is somewhat ad hoc, with little guidance on how to ensure that static reasoning principles are valid. In my dissertation, I present a semantic framework for design and metatheoretic analysis of gradually typed languages based on the theory of embedding-projection pairs. I show that this semantics enables proofs of the fundamental soundness theorems of gradual typing, and that it is robust, applying it to different evaluation orders and programming features.

Parametric polymorphism and gradual typing have proven to be a difficult combination, with no language yet produced that satisfies the fundamental theorems of each: parametricity and graduality. Notably, Toro, Labrada, and Tanter (POPL 2019) conjecture that for any gradual extension of System F that uses dynamic type generation, graduality and parametricity are “simply incompatible”. However, we argue that it is not graduality and parametricity that are incompatible per se, but instead that combining the syntax of System F with dynamic type generation as in previous work necessitates type-directed computation, which we show has been a common source of graduality and parametricity violations in previous work.

We then show that by modifying the syntax of universal and existential types to make the type name generation explicit, we remove the need for type-directed computation, and get a language that satisfies both graduality and parametricity theorems. The language has a simple runtime semantics, which can be explained by translation to a statically typed language where the dynamic type is interpreted as a dynamically extensible sum type. Far from being in conflict, we show that the parametricity theorem follows as a direct corollary of a relational interpretation of the graduality property.

We compare the expressive power of three programming abstractions for user-defined computational effects: Plotkin and Pretnar’s effect handlers, Filinski’s monadic reflection, and delimited control. This comparison allows a precise discussion about the relative expressiveness of each programming abstraction. It also demonstrates the sensitivity of the relative expressiveness of user-defined effects to seemingly orthogonal language features. We present three calculi, one per abstraction, extending Levy’s call-by-push-value. For each calculus, we present syntax, operational semantics, a natural type-and-effect system, and, for effect handlers and monadic reflection, a set-theoretic denotational semantics. We establish their basic metatheoretic properties: safety, termination, and, where applicable, soundness and adequacy. Using Felleisen’s notion of a macro translation, we show that these abstractions can macro express each other, and show which translations preserve typeability. We use the adequate finitary set-theoretic denotational semantics for the monadic calculus to show that effect handlers cannot be macro expressed while preserving typeability either by monadic reflection or by delimited control. Our argument fails with simple changes to the type system such as polymorphism and inductive types. We supplement our development with a mechanised Abella formalisation.

Gradually typed languages are designed to support both dynamically typed and statically typed programming styles while preserving the benefits of each. While existing gradual type soundness theorems for these languages aim to show that type-based reasoning is preserved when moving from the fully static setting to a gradual one, these theorems do not imply that correctness of type-based refactorings and optimizations is preserved. Establishing correctness of program transformations is technically difficult, because it requires reasoning about program equivalence, and is often neglected in the metatheory of gradual languages.

In this paper, we propose an axiomatic account of program equivalence in a gradual cast calculus, which we formalize in a logic we call gradual type theory (GTT). Based on Levy’s call-by-push-value, GTT gives an axiomatic account of both call-by-value and call-by-name gradual languages. Based on our axiomatic account we prove many theorems that justify optimizations and refactorings in gradually typed languages. For example, uniqueness principles for gradual type connectives show that if the βη laws hold for a connective, then casts between that connective must be equivalent to the so-called “lazy” cast semantics. Contrapositively, this shows that “eager” cast semantics violates the extensionality of function types. As another example, we show that gradual upcasts are pure functions and, dually, gradual downcasts are strict functions. We show the consistency and applicability of our axiomatic theory by proving that a contract-based implementation using the lazy cast semantics gives a logical relations model of our type theory, where equivalence in GTT implies contextual equivalence of the programs. Since GTT also axiomatizes the dynamic gradual guarantee, our model also establishes this central theorem of gradual typing. The model is parametrized by the implementation of the dynamic types, and so gives a family of implementations that validate type-based optimization and the gradual guarantee.

We present a resource-management model for ML-style programming languages, designed to be compatible with the OCaml philosophy and runtime model. This is a proposal to extend the OCaml language with destructors, move semantics, and resource polymorphism, to improve its safety, efficiency, interoperability, and expressiveness. It builds on the ownership-and-borrowing models of systems programming languages (Cyclone, C++11, Rust) and on linear types in functional programming (Linear Lisp, Clean, Alms). It continues a synthesis of resources from systems programming and resources in linear logic initiated by Baker. It is a combination of many known and some new ideas. On the novel side, it highlights the good mathematical structure of Stroustrup’s “Resource acquisition is initialisation” (RAII) idiom for resource management based on destructors, a notion sometimes confused with finalizers, and builds on it a notion of resource polymorphism, inspired by polarisation in proof theory, that mixes C++‘s RAII and a tracing garbage collector (GC). The proposal targets a new spot in the design space, with an automatic and predictable resource-management model, at the same time based on lightweight and expressive language abstractions. It is backwards-compatible: current code is expected to run with the same performance, the new abstractions fully combine with the current ones, and it supports a resource-polymorphic extension of libraries. It does so with only a few additions to the runtime, and it integrates with the current GC implementation. It is also compatible with the upcoming multicore extension, and suggests that the Rust model for eliminating data-races applies. Interesting questions arise for a safe and practical type system, many of which have already been thoroughly investigated in the languages and prototypes Cyclone, Rust, and Alms.

In this paper, we show how to integrate linear types with type dependency, by extending the linear/non-linear calculus of Benton to support type dependency.