Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kl59c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T03:03:58.298Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

! and ? – Storage as tensorial strength

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2009

R. F. Blute ,
J. R. B. Cockett  and
R. A. G. Seely
R. F. Blute
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Ottawa, 585 King Edward St., Ottawa, ON, K1N6N5, Canada. Email rblute@mathstat.uottawa. ca
J. R. B. Cockett
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, Calgary, AL, T2N 1N4, Canada. Email robin@cpsc. ucalgary. Ca
R. A. G. Seely
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke St., Montréal, PQ, H3A 2K6, Canada. Email rags@math.mcgill.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We continue our study of the negation-free structure of multiplicative linear logic, as represented by the structure of weakly distributive categories, to consider the ‘exponentials’! and ? in the weakly distributive context. In addition to the usual triple and cotriple structure that one would expect on each of the two operators, there must be some connection between them to replace the de Morgan relationship found in the linear logic context. This turns out to be the notion of tensorial strength. We analyze coherence for this situation, using a modification of the usual nets due to Danos, which is a form suitable for linear logic with exponentials but without negation.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Structures in Computer Science , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , August 1996 , pp. 313 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barr, M. (1991) *-Autonomous categories and linear logic. Math. Struct, in Comp. Science 1 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, B. N., Bierman, G., de Paiva, V., AND Hyland, M., (1992) Term assignment for intuitionistic linear logic (preliminary report). Technical Report 262, University of Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierman, G. M. (1995) What is a categorical model of intuitionistic linear logic?. In: Dezani, M., (ed.) Proceedings of Conference on Typed lambda calculus and Applications, Springer-Verlag. (Also: Technical Report 333, University of Cambridge, 1994.)Google Scholar
Blute, R. F. (1995) Linear Logic, Coherence and Dinaturality. Theoretical Computer Science 115 3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blute, R., Cockett, J. R. B., Seely, R. A. G. and Trimble, T. H. (1992) Natural deduction and coherence for weakly distributive categories. To appear in Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra. (Also: Preprint, McGill University, 1992, revised 1994.)Google Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. (1995) Introduction to distributive categories. Math. Struct. in Comp. Science 3 277–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Seely, R. A. G. (1992) Weakly distributive categories. In: Fourman, M. P., Johnstone, P. T. and Pitts, A. M. (eds.) Applications of Categories to Computer Science, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 177 45–65. (Expanded version to appear in Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Seely, R. A. G. (1995) Proof theory for linear logics without negation. Preprint, McGill University.Google Scholar
Danos, V., (1990) La logique linéaire appliquée à l’étude de divers processus de normalisation et principalement du λ-calcul, Doctoral dissertation, Université de Paris.Google Scholar
Danos, V., AND Regnier, L., (1989) The structure of multiplicatives. Archive for Math. Logic 28 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, T., (1976) Coalgebras and Cartesian categories. Communications in Algebra 7 665–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard, J.-Y. (1987) Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50 1–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard, J.-Y. (1991) A new constructive logic: classical logic. Math. Struct. in Comp. Science 1 255–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyal, A., AND Street, R., (1991) The geometry of tensor calculus I. Advances in Mathematics 88 55–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambek, J., (1969) Deductive systems and categories II. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Mathematics 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, P., AND Winkler, I., (1994) Constant-only multiplicative linear logic is NP-complete. Theoretical Computer Science 135 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prawitz, D., (1965) Natural Deduction, Almqvist and Wiksell, Uppsala.Google Scholar
Seely, R. A. G. (1989) Linear logic, *-autonomous categories and cofree coalgebras. In: Gray, J., AND Scedrov, A. (eds.) Categories in Computer Science and Logic Contemporary Mathematics 92 Am. Math. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trimble, T. H. (1994) Linear logic, bimodules, and full coherence for autonomous categories, Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University.Google Scholar