Bunched Implications Research Articles

Classical BI: Its Semantics and Proof Theory

We present Classical BI (CBI), a new addition to the family of bunched logics which originates in O'Hearn and Pym's logic of bunched implications BI. CBI differs from existing bunched logics in that its multiplicative connectives behave classically rather than intuitionistically (including in particular a multiplicative version of classical negation). At the semantic level, CBI-formulas have the normal bunched logic reading as declarative statements about resources, but its resource models necessarily feature more structure than those for other bunched logics; principally, they satisfy the requirement that every resource has a unique dual. At the proof-theoretic level, a very natural formalism for CBI is provided by a display calculus \`a la Belnap, which can be seen as a generalisation of the bunched sequent calculus for BI. In this paper we formulate the aforementioned model theory and proof theory for CBI, and prove some fundamental results about the logic, most notably completeness of the proof theory with respect to the semantics.

Structuring the verification of heap-manipulating programs

Most systems based on separation logic consider only restricted forms of implication or non-separating conjunction, as full support for these connectives requires a non-trivial notion of variable context, inherited from the logic of bunched implications (BI). We show that in an expressive type theory such as Coq, one can avoid the intricacies of BI, and support full separation logic very efficiently, using the native structuring primitives of the type theory. Our proposal uses reflection to enable equational reasoning about heaps, and Hoare triples with binary postconditions to further facilitate it. We apply these ideas to Hoare Type Theory, to obtain a new proof technique for verification of higher-order imperative programs that is general, extendable, and supports very short proofs, even without significant use of automation by tactics. We demonstrate the usability of the technique by verifying the fast congruence closure algorithm of Nieuwenhuis and Oliveras, employed in the state-of-the-art Barcelogic SAT solver.

Algebra and logic for access control

Abstract The access control problem in computer security is fundamentally concerned with the ability of system entities to see, make use of, or alter various system resources. We provide a mathematical framework for modelling and reasoning about (distributed) systems with access control. This is based on a calculus of resources and processes together with a Hennessy–Milner-style modal logic, based on the connectives of bunched logic, for which an appropriate correspondence theorem obtains. As a consequence we get a consistent account of both operational behaviour and logical reasoning for systems with access control features. In particular, we are able to introduce a process combinator that describes, as a form of concurrent composition, the action of one agent in the role of another, and provide a logical characterization of this operator via a modality ‘says’. We give a range of examples, including analyses of co-signing, roles, and chains of trust, which illustrates the utility of our mathematical framework.

Classical BI

We show how to extend O'Hearn and Pym's logic of bunched implications, BI, to classical BI (CBI), in which both the additive and the multiplicative connectives behave classically. Specifically, CBI is a non-conservative extension of (propositional) Boolean BI that includes multiplicative versions of falsity, negation and disjunction. We give an algebraic semantics for CBI that leads us naturally to consider resource models of CBI in which every resource has a unique dual. We then give a cut-eliminating proof system for CBI, based on Belnap's display logic, and demonstrate soundness and completeness of this proof system with respect to our semantics.

Bunching for Regions and Locations

There are a number of applied lambda-calculi in which terms and types are annotated with parameters denoting either locations or locations in machine memory. Such calculi have been designed with safe memory-management operations in mind.It is difficult to construct directly denotational models for existing calculi of this kind. We approach the problem differently, by starting from a class of mathematical models that describe some of the essential semantic properties intended in these calculi. In particular, disjointness conditions between regions (or locations) are implicit in many of the memory-management operations.Bunched polymorphism provides natural type-theoretic mechanisms for capturing the disjointness conditions in such models. We illustrate this by adding regions to the basic disjointness model of αλ, the lambda-calculus associated to the logic of bunched implications. We show how both additive and multiplicative polymorphic quantifiers arise naturally in our models. A locations model is a special case. In order to relate this enterprise back to previous work on memory-management, we provide an example in which the model is refined and used to provide a denotational semantics for a language with explicit allocation and disposal of regions.

The semantics of BI and resource tableaux

The logic of bunched implications, BI, provides a logical analysis of a basic notion of resource that is rich enough, for example, to form the logical basis for ‘pointer logic’ and ‘separation logic’ semantics for programs that manipulate mutable data structures. We develop a theory of semantic tableaux for BI, so providing an elegant basis for efficient theorem proving tools for BI. It is based on the use of an algebra of labels for BI's tableaux to solve the resource-distribution problem, the labels being the elements of resource models. For BI with inconsistency, , the challenge consists in dealing with BI's Grothendieck topological models within such a proof-search method, based on labels. We prove soundness and completeness theorems for a resource tableaux method TBI with respect to this semantics and provide a way to build countermodels from so-called dependency graphs. Then, from these results, we can define a new resource semantics of BI, based on partially defined monoids, and prove that this semantics is complete. Such a semantics, based on partiality, is closely related to the semantics of BI's (intuitionistic) pointer and separation logics. Returning to the tableaux calculus, we propose a new version with liberalised rules for which the countermodels are closely related to the topological Kripke semantics of BI. As consequences of the relationships between semantics of BI and resource tableaux, we prove two new strong results for propositional BI: its decidability and the finite model property with respect to topological semantics.

Possible worlds and resources: the semantics of BI

The logic of bunched implications, BI, is a substructural system which freely combines an additive (intuitionistic) and a multiplicative (linear) implication via bunches (contexts with two combining operations, one which admits Weakening and Contraction and one which does not). BI may be seen to arise from two main perspectives. On the one hand, from proof-theoretic or categorical concerns and, on the other, from a possible-worlds semantics based on preordered (commutative) monoids. This semantics may be motivated from a basic model of the notion of resource. We explain BI's proof-theoretic, categorical and semantic origins. We discuss in detail the question of completeness, explaining the essential distinction between BI with and without ⊥ (the unit of ∨). We give an extensive discussion of BI as a semantically based logic of resources, giving concrete models based on Petri nets, ambients, computer memory, logic programming, and money.

Ribbon Proofs

We present ‘Ribbon Proofs’, a graphical proof system for the Logic of Bunched Implications (BI). We give the informal, graphical, notation, we formalise the system algebraically and sketch the proof of its soundness and completeness. We discuss the spatial and geometrical nature of the proof system and its relation to BI's spatial model theory.

Resource-distribution via Boolean constraints

We consider the problem of searching for proofs in sequential presentations of logics with multiplicative (or intensional) connectives. Specifically, we start with the multiplicative fragment of linear logic and extend, on the one hand, to linear logic with its additives and, on the other, to the additives of the logic of bunched implications ( BI ). We give an algebraic method for calculating the distribution of the side-formulæ in multiplicative rules which allows the occurrence or non-occurrence of a formula on a branch of a proof to be determined once sufficient information is available. Each formula in the conclusion of such a rule is assigned a Boolean expression. As a search proceeds, a set of Boolean constraint equations is generated. We show that a solution to such a set of equations determines a proof corresponding to the given search. We explain a range of strategies, from the lazy to the eager, for solving sets of constraint equations. We indicate how to apply our methods systematically to large family of relevant systems.

Pseudo-distributive Laws

We address the question of how elegantly to combine a number of different structures, such as finite product structure, monoidal structure, and colimiting structure, on a category. Extending work of Marmolejo and Lack, we develop the definition of a pseudo-distributive law between pseudo-monads, and we show how the definition and the main theorems about it may be used to model several such structures simultaneously. Specifically, we address the relationship between pseudo-distributive laws and the lifting of one pseudo-monad to the 2-category of algebras and to the Kleisli bicategory of another. This, for instance, sheds light on the preservation of some structures but not others along the Yoneda embedding. Our leading examples are given by the use of open maps to model bisimulation and by the logic of bunched implications.

Kripke Resource Models of a Dependently-typed, Bunched -calculus

The λΛ‐calculus is a dependent type theory with both linear and intuitionistic dependent function spaces. It can be seen to arise in two ways. Firstly, in logical frameworks, where it is the language of the RLF logical framework and can uniformly represent linear and other relevant logics. Secondly, it is a presentation of the proof‐objects of a structural variation, with Dereliction, of a fragment of BI, the logic of bunched implications. As such, it is also closely related to linear logic. BI is a logic which directly combines linear and intuitionistic implication and, in its predicate version, has both linear and intuitionistic quantifiers. The λΛ‐calculus is the dependent type theory which generalizes both implications and quantifiers. In this paper, we study the categorical semantics of the λΛ‐calculus, gives a theory of ‘Kripke resource models’, i.e. monoid‐indexed sets of functorial Kripke models, in which the monoid gives an account of resource consumption. A class of concrete, set‐theoretic models is given by the category of families of sets parametrized over a small monoidal category, in which the intuitionistic dependent function space is described in the established way, but the linear dependent function space is described using Day's tensor product.

BI as an assertion language for mutable data structures

Reynolds has developed a logic for reasoning about mutable data structures in which the pre- and postconditions are written in an intuitionistic logic enriched with a spatial form of conjunction. We investigate the approach from the point of view of the logic BI of bunched implications of O'Hearnand Pym. We begin by giving a model in which the law of the excluded middleholds, thus showing that the approach is compatible with classical logic. The relationship between the intuitionistic and classical versions of the system is established by a translation, analogous to a translation from intuitionistic logic into the modal logic S4. We also consider the question of completeness of the axioms. BI's spatial implication is used to express weakest preconditions for object-component assignments, and an axiom for allocating a cons cell is shown to be complete under an interpretation of triplesthat allows a command to be applied to states with dangling pointers. We make this latter a feature, by incorporating an operation, and axiom, for disposing of memory. Finally, we describe a local character enjoyed by specifications in the logic, and show how this enables a class of frame axioms, which say what parts of the heap don't change, to be inferred automatically.

The Logic of Bunched Implications

AbstractWe introduce a logicBIin which a multiplicative (or linear) and an additive (or intuitionistic) implication live side-by-side. The propositional version ofBIarises from an analysis of the proof-theoretic relationship between conjunction and implication; it can be viewed as a merging of intuitionistic logic and multiplicative intuitionistic linear logic. The naturality ofBIcan be seen categorically: models of propositionalBI's proofs are given by bicartesian doubly closed categories, i.e., categories which freely combine the semantics of propositional intuitionistic logic and propositional multiplicative intuitionistic linear logic. The predicate version ofBIincludes, in addition to standard additive quantifiers, multiplicative (or intensional) quantifiersandwhich arise from observing restrictions on structural rules on the level of terms as well as propositions. We discuss computational interpretations, based on sharing, at both the propositional and predicate levels.

Logic Programming with Bunched Implications: Extended Abstract

We introduce the logic of bunched implications, BI, in which multiplicative (or linear) and additive (or intuitionistic) implications live side-by-side. We provide a truth conditional semantics, a proof theory and a categorical semantics of proofs. We explain how BI arises as a logic of resources and sketch a development of this computational interpretation, which is quite different from that of linear logic, in the setting of logic programming. Predicate BI, used in our account of logic programming, admits not only the usual (additive) quantifiers but also multiplicative (or intensional) quantifiers if the kind long sought in relevant logic.