MOQCUA

Sup:
A logical connective for non-determinism
Alejandro Díaz-Caro
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE QUILMES
& CONICET / UNIVERSIDAD de BUENOS AIRES
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Based on recent works with

Gilles Dowek
and with
Octavio Malherbe
MOQCUA Team Seminar

December 7, 2023 – Nancy, France
The sup connective
Harmony
With generalized elimination rules
Example 1
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ∧ Γ ⊢ A ∧ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ ⊢ A ∧ B Γ, B ⊢ C
i ∧e1 ∧e2
Γ⊢A∧B Γ⊢C Γ⊢C
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ∧ π3
i
Γ⊢A∧B Γ, A ⊢ C
∧e1 −→ (π1 /A)π3
Γ⊢C
Example 2
Γ⊢A ∨ Γ⊢B ∨ Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C

i1 i2 ∨e
Γ⊢A∨B Γ⊢A∨B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A ∧ π2 π3
i1
Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
∧e −→ (π1 /A)π2
Γ⊢C
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 1 / 6: The sup connective Slide 1 / 21
Not harmony
Insufficiency [Prior 1960]
Γ⊢A Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonki tonke
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A π2
tonki
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonke
Γ⊢C
Not harmony
Insufficiency [Prior 1960]
Γ⊢A Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonki tonke
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A π2
tonki
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonke
Γ⊢C
Excessiveness
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ B ⌣i Γ ⊢ A ⌣ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⌣e
Γ⊢A⌣B Γ⊢C
π1 π2
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ B ⌣i π3 π4 (π1 /A)π3
Γ⊢A⌣B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⌣e (π2 /A)π4
Γ⊢C
⊙ connective
In PL [A.DC. & Gilles Dowek, ICTAC 2021, TCS 2023]
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ ⊢ A ⊙ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ ⊢ A ⊙ B Γ, B ⊢ C Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢C Γ⊢C Γ⊢C
⊙ connective
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ⊢C
⊙ connective
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ⊢C
In ILL, an additive connective [A.DC. & Gilles Dowek, FSCD 2022, arXiv:2201.11221]
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B ∆, A ⊢ C ∆, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A Γ, ∆ ⊢ C
⊙ connective
As an additive conjunction
The rule
Γ⊢A⊙B ∆, A ⊢ C ∆, B ⊢ C
⊙e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ C
Can be derived in ILL as

Γ ⊢ A&B
&
Γ ⊢ A ⊕e1
i1
Γ⊢A⊕B ∆, A ⊢ C ∆, B ⊢ C
⊕e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ C
or
Γ ⊢ A&B
&e2
Γ⊢B ⊕i2
Γ⊢A⊕B ∆, A ⊢ C ∆, B ⊢ C
⊕e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ C
which one we use?. . . Non-deterministic choice!

The L⊙-calculus
The L⊙-calculus
Intuitionistic linear logic connectives
Truth Falsehood Implication Conjunction Disjunction Superposition

Prop. logic ⊤ ⊥ ⇒ ∧ ∨ ⊙
Multiplicative 1 ⊸ ⊗
Additive ⊤ 0 & ⊕ ⊙
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 2 / 6: The L⊙-calculus Slide 5 / 21
The L⊙-calculus
Intuitionistic linear logic connectives
Truth Falsehood Implication Conjunction Disjunction Superposition

Prop. logic ⊤ ⊥ ⇒ ∧ ∨ ⊙
Multiplicative 1 ⊸ ⊗
Additive ⊤ 0 & ⊕ ⊙
Proof terms
introductions eliminations connective
t=x |⋆ | t;t (1)
| λx.t | tt (⊸)
|t ⊗t | let x ⊗ y = t in t (⊗)
| ⟨⟩ (⊤)
| err(t) (0)
| ⟨t, t⟩ | fst(t) | snd(t) (&)
| inl(t) | inr(t) | match(t, x.t, y .t) (⊕)
| [t, t] | fst⊙ (t) | snd⊙ (t)| match⊙ (t, x.t, y .t) (⊙)
The L⊙-calculus
Some deduction rules
Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B Γ ⊢ t : A&B Γ ⊢ t : A&B

&i &e1 &e2
Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B Γ ⊢ fst(t) : A Γ ⊢ snd(t) : B
Γ⊢t:A ⊕i1 Γ⊢t:B ⊕i2
Γ ⊢ inl(t) : A ⊕ B Γ ⊢ inr(t) : A ⊕ B
Γ ⊢ t : A ⊕ B ∆, x : A ⊢ r : C ∆, y : B ⊢ s : C
⊕e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match(t, x.r , y .s) : C
Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B ⊙ Γ⊢t:A ⊙ B Γ⊢t:A ⊙ B

i ⊙e1 ⊙e2
Γ ⊢ [t, u] : A ⊙ B Γ ⊢ fst⊙ (t) : A Γ ⊢ snd⊙ (t) : B
Γ⊢t :A⊙B ∆, x : A ⊢ r : C ∆, y : B ⊢ s : C
⊙
⊙e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match (t, x.r , y .s) : C
The L⊙-calculus
Some reduction rules
fst⟨t, u⟩ → t fst⊙ [t, u] → t

snd⟨t, u⟩ → u snd⊙ [t, u] → u
match(inl(t), x.r , y .s) → (t/x)r match⊙ ([t, u], x.r , y .s) → (t/x)r
match(inr(u), x.r , y .s) → (u/y )s match⊙ ([t, u], x.r , y .s) → (u/y )s
We can consider
match⊙ ([t, u], x.r , y .s)
equivalent to
match(inl(fst⟨t, u⟩), x.r , y .s) or match(inr(snd⟨t, u⟩), x.r , y .s)
which one we use?. . . Non-deterministic choice!

The LS -calculus and the linearity
Addition and multiplication by scalar
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ A sum Γ ⊢ A prod
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 3 / 6: The LS -calculus and the linearity Slide 8 / 21
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
Now some proofs cannot be reduced, e.g.
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&
Γ ⊢ A & B prodi
Γ ⊢ A&B
&e
Γ⊢A
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&
Γ ⊢ A & B prodi
Γ ⊢ A&B
&e
Γ⊢A
Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

π1 π2 π1 π2
Γ ⊢ A prod Γ ⊢ B prod Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&i
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ ⊢ A&B
&i &e
Γ ⊢ A&B Γ ⊢ A prod
&e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible

Scalars, addition and multiplication by scalar
ax Γ ⊢ t : A Γ ⊢ u : A sum Γ ⊢ t : A prod
Γ ⊢ s.⋆ : 1 Γ⊢t +u :A Γ⊢s •t :A
Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B
&i
Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B
prod
Γ ⊢ s • ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B
&e
Γ ⊢ fst(s • ⟨t, u⟩) : A
Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

Γ ⊢ t : A prod Γ ⊢ u : B prod Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B
&i
Γ⊢s •t :A Γ⊢s •u :B Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B
&i &e
Γ ⊢ ⟨s • t, s • u⟩ : A & B Γ ⊢ fst⟨t, u⟩ : A
&e prod
Γ ⊢ fst⟨s • t, s • u⟩ : A Γ ⊢ s • fst⟨t, u⟩ : A
We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible: s • ⟨t, u⟩ → ⟨s • t, s • u⟩

Syntactic linearity
Theorem (Linearity)
| & ·{z
Let A be any proposition, and B = 1 · · & 1} ⊢ t : A ⊸ B, and u, v ∈ A, then
n≥1
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
Syntactic linearity
Theorem (Linearity)
| & ·{z
n≥1
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1
t(1. ⋆ + 2.⋆) −→∗ λy .y 3.⋆ (t1.⋆) + (t2.⋆) −→∗ λy .(y 1.⋆) + (y 2.⋆)
But they are observationally equivalent!
Syntactic linearity
Theorem (Linearity)
| & ·{z
n≥1
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1
t(1. ⋆ + 2.⋆) −→∗ λy .y 3.⋆ (t1.⋆) + (t2.⋆) −→∗ λy .(y 1.⋆) + (y 2.⋆)
But they are observationally equivalent!
Theorem (Generalized linearity)

Let A, B be any propositions, ⊢ t : A ⊸ B, and u, v ∈ A, then
t(u + v ) ∼ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ∼ a • (tu)
Quantum computing
Encoding quantum computing in the L⊙C -calculus
Qubits and norm
Definition (Qubits: Qn )
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
Let t closed irreductible proof of Qn .
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 4 / 6: Quantum computing Slide 11 / 21
Qubits and norm
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2
u
Convention u closed irreductible proof of Qn =⇒ alternative expression of the n-qubit ∥u∥ .
Example: √12 |0⟩ + √12 |1⟩ can be expressed by [ √12 .⋆, √12 .⋆] or by [1.⋆, 1.⋆].
Qubits and norm
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2
u
Convention u closed irreductible proof of Qn =⇒ alternative expression of the n-qubit ∥u∥ .
Example: √12 |0⟩ + √12 |1⟩ can be expressed by [ √12 .⋆, √12 .⋆] or by [1.⋆, 1.⋆].
We can asign probabilities to the non-deterministic reductions of match⊙
Measurement in the L⊙C -calculus
Definition (Measurement of n qubits)
measn = λx.match⊙ (x, y .[y , 0Qn−1 ], z.[0Qn−1 , z]) ⊢ measn : Qn ⊸ Qn
Definition (Bits: B)
B=1⊕1 0 = inl(1.⋆) 1 = inr(1.⋆)
Convention Proofs of bits are taken modulo normalization.
a • 0 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 0 a • 1 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 1
Definition (Bits: B)
B=1⊕1 0 = inl(1.⋆) 1 = inr(1.⋆)
Convention Proofs of bits are taken modulo normalization.
a • 0 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 0 a • 1 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 1
Definition (Classical output of the measurement)

meas′1 = λx.match⊙ (x, y .y ;0, z.z;1) ⊢ meas′1 : Qn ⊸ B
Example
meas′1 [a.⋆, b.⋆]
2
|b|2
Reduces to a.0 with probability |a|2|a|
+|b|2 Reduces to b.1 with probability |a|2 +|b|2
Example: Deutsch’s algorithm
Preliminaires
Definition (The four boolean functions)

if = λx.λy .λz.match(x, w1 .w1 ;y , w2 .w2 ;z) ⊢ if : B ⊸ A ⊸ A ⊸ A
if 0 u v → 1 • u if 1 u v → 1 • v
The four Boolean functions mapping 0 to a and 1 to b are λx.if x a b
Preliminaires
Definition (The four boolean functions)

if = λx.λy .λz.match(x, w1 .w1 ;y , w2 .w2 ;z) ⊢ if : B ⊸ A ⊸ A ⊸ A
if 0 u v → 1 • u if 1 u v → 1 • v
The four Boolean functions mapping 0 to a and 1 to b are λx.if x a b
Definition (⊢ U : (B ⊸ B) ⊸ Q2 ⊸ Q2 )

⊙ ⊙
U = λf .λq. M0 π1 (π1 q) + M1 π2⊙ (π1⊙ q) + M2 π1⊙ (π2⊙ q) +
⊙ ⊙
M3 π2 (π2 q)
where M0 , M1 , M2 , and M3 are the proofs of 1 ⊸ Q2
M0 = λs.(s;if (f 0) [[1.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 1.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]])

M1 = λs.(s;if (f 0) [[0.⋆, 1.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[1.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]])
M2 = λs.(s;if (f 1) [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [1.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 1.⋆]])
M3 = λs.(s;if (f 1) [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 1.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [1.⋆, 0.⋆]])
Deutsch = λf .meas′2 ((H ⊗ I ) (U f | + −⟩))

⊢ Deutsch : (B ⊸ B) ⊸ B
Example
⊢f :B⊸B
▶ If f constant function, Deutsch f −→∗(1) a • 0, for some scalar a,
▶ If f if not constant, Deutsch f −→∗(1) a • 1 for some scalar a.
Categorical model
A categorical model of the LS -calculus
[ADC & O. Malherbe, arXiv:2205.02142, 2022]
Definition (Semiring)
▶ (S, +) commutative monoid with identity 0 In particular {∗} is a
▶ (S, ·) commutative monoid with identity 1 semiring, with 0 = 1 = ∗
▶ · distributes w.r.t. +
▶ For any s ∈ S, 0 · s = 0
Definition (S-semimodule)
(A, +) commutative monoid with additive identity 0 and • : S × A → A satisfying:
(s · s ′ ) • a = s • (s ′ • a) 1•a=a
′ ′
s • (a + a ) = (s • a) + (s • a ) s •0=0•a=0
(s + s ′ ) • a = (s • a) + (s ′ • a)
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 5 / 6: Categorical model Slide 15 / 21
A categorical model of the LS -calculus
[ADC & O. Malherbe, arXiv:2205.02142, 2022]
Definition (Category SMS ) Theorem

Obj(SMS ) = {A | A is a S-semimodule} SMS is a symmetic monoidal closed
Arr(SMS ) = {f | f is a S-homomorphism} category with biproduct
J1K = S J0K = {∗}

JA ⊗ BK = JAK ⊗ JBK JA & BK = JAK × JBK
JA ⊸ BK = [JAK → JBK] JA ⊕ BK = JAK + JBK
J⊤K = {∗}
Theorem (Soundness) Theorem (Adequacy)

If t → u, then JΓ ⊢ t : AK = JΓ ⊢ u : AK If JΓ ⊢ t : AK = JΓ ⊢ u : AK then t ≡ u
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 5 / 6: Categorical model Slide 16 / 21
Interpreting the non-determinism
[A.DC. & Octavio Malherbe, arXiv:2309.04624, 2023]
Moggi’s approach:
1. PA = {X | X ⊆ A}
2. Calculate the two outputs (a1 , a2 ).
3. Map them into {a1 , a2 }
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Section 6 / 6: Interpreting the non-determinism Slide 17 / 21
Moggi’s approach:
1. PA = {X | X ⊆ A}
Problem: the map ξ(a1 , a2 ) = {a1 , a2 } is not linear
ξ((a1 , a2 ) +A×A (a3 , a4 )) = ξ(a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 ) = {a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 }

ξ(a1 , a2 ) +A×A ξ(a3 , a4 ) = {a1 , a2 } +PA {a3 , a4 } = {a1 +A a3 , a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 }
Moggi’s approach:
1. PA = {X | X ⊆ A}

Possible alternative:
1. LA = {ℓ | ℓ is a list of elements of A}
3. Map them into [a1 , a2 ]
Moggi’s approach:
1. PA = {X | X ⊆ A}

Possible alternative:
1. LA = {ℓ | ℓ is a list of elements of A}
3. Map them into [a1 , a2 ]
Problem: Pointwise sum does not represent the mixture of non-deterministic choices!
Our (first) approach: using the codiagonal
First attempt
∆ = ⟨id, id⟩ ∇ = [id, id]
A
id ∆ id
A π1 A×A π2 A
A i1 A+A i2 A
id ∇ id
ξ
Instead of A × A −→ PA defined by ξ(a1 , a2 ) = {a1 , a2 }
∇
use A × A −→ A defined by ∇(a1 , a2 ) = a1 +A a2
First attempt
Problem:
∆ = ⟨id, id⟩ ∇ = [id, id] ▶ t → t1 and t → t2
A
id ∆ id
A π1 A×A π2 A
A i1 A+A i2 A
id ∇ id
ξ
∇
First attempt
Problem:
A ▶ (t, v ) → (t1 , v ) and (t, v ) → (t2 , v )
id ∆ id
A π1 A×A π2 A
A i1 A+A i2 A
id ∇ id
ξ
∇
First attempt
Problem:
A ▶ (t, v ) → (t1 , v ) and (t, v ) → (t2 , v )
▶ ∇((t1 , v ), (t2 , v ))
id ∆ id
= (t1 , v ) +A×B (t2 , v )
A π1 A×A π2 A = (t1 +A t2 , v +B v)
A i1 A+A i2 A
id ∇ id
ξ
∇
First attempt
Problem:
A ▶ (t, v ) → (t1 , v ) and (t, v ) → (t2 , v )
▶ ∇((t1 , v ), (t2 , v ))
id ∆ id
= (t1 , v ) +A×B (t2 , v )
A π1 A×A π2 A = (t1 +A t2 , v +B v )
▶ But if first reduce t and then place it
A i1 A+A i2 A
in the context (_, v ):
id ∇ id
(∇(t1 , t2 ), v ) = (t1 +A t2 , v )
A
ξ
∇
Our approach: using a weighted codiagonal
∆pq = ⟨p̂, q̂⟩ ∇pq = [p̂, q̂]
A
p̂ ∆pq q̂
A π1 A×A π2 A
A i1 A+A i2 A
p̂ ∇pq q̂
A
ξ
∇pq
use A × A −→ A defined by ∇pq (a1 , a2 ) = p •A a1 +A q •A a2
with p +S q = 1
Our approach: using a weighted codiagonal
∆pq = ⟨p̂, q̂⟩ ∇pq = [p̂, q̂]
A Same example:
p̂ ∆pq q̂
▶ t → t1 and t → t2
▶ (t, v ) → (t1 , v ) and (t, v ) → (t2 , v )
A π1 A×A π2 A
▶ ∇pq ((t1 , v ), (t2 , v ))
A i1 A+A i2 A = p •A×B (t1 , v ) +A×B q •A×B (t2 , v )
p̂ ∇pq q̂
= (p •A t1 +A q •A t2 , v )
A
ξ
∇pq
use A × A −→ A defined by ∇pq (a1 , a2 ) = p •A a1 +A q •A a2
with p +S q = 1
Interpretation of ⊙ using ∇pq
JA ⊙ BK = JAK × JBK Γ⊢t :A⊙B x : A, ∆ ⊢ u : C y : B, ∆ ⊢ v : C

⊙
⊙e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match (t, x.u, y .v ) : C
t⊗id d u×v ∇pq

JΓK ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK × JBK) ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK ⊗ J∆K) × (JBK ⊗ J∆K) −→ JC K × JC K −→ JC K
Interpretation of ⊙ using ∇pq
JA ⊙ BK = JAK × JBK Γ⊢t :A⊙B x : A, ∆ ⊢ u : C y : B, ∆ ⊢ v : C

⊙
⊙e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match (t, x.u, y .v ) : C
t⊗id d u×v ∇pq

JΓK ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK × JBK) ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK ⊗ J∆K) × (JBK ⊗ J∆K) −→ JC K × JC K −→ JC K
Similarity with ⊕e
JA ⊕ BK = JAK + JBK Γ ⊢ t : A ⊕ B x : A, ∆ ⊢ u : C y : B, ∆ ⊢ v : C
⊕e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match(t, x.u, y .v ) : C
t⊗id d [u,v ]
JΓK ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK + JBK) ⊗ J∆K −→ (JAK ⊗ J∆K) + (JBK ⊗ J∆K) −→ JC K
[u,v ] u×v ∇
A + B −→ C equivalent to A × B −→ C × C −→ C
u×v ∇ u×v ∇pq
So changed A × B −→ C × C −→ C by A × B −→ C × C −→ C
Summarizing
The ⊙ connective as a non-harmonious connective in PL and IMALL
Linearity result from sum and scalar multiplication in the linear lambda-calculus
The L⊙C -calculus is suitable for quantum computing
Categorical model for the extended linear lambda-calculus (semimodules over a semiring).
Novel approach for non-determinism in a category with biproducts,

when Moggi’s Powerset Monad is not possible
Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Summarizing Slide 21 / 21

MOQCUA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

MOQCUA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MOQCUA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sup:

A logical connective for non-determinism

Based on recent works with

MOQCUA Team Seminar

Γ⊢A ∨ Γ⊢B ∨ Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C

Can be derived in ILL as

which one we use?. . . Non-deterministic choice!

Truth Falsehood Implication Conjunction Disjunction Superposition

Truth Falsehood Implication Conjunction Disjunction Superposition

Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B Γ ⊢ t : A&B Γ ⊢ t : A&B

Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B ⊙ Γ⊢t:A ⊙ B Γ⊢t:A ⊙ B

fst⟨t, u⟩ → t fst⊙ [t, u] → t

match⊙ ([t, u], x.r , y .s)

match(inl(fst⟨t, u⟩), x.r , y .s) or match(inr(snd⟨t, u⟩), x.r , y .s)

which one we use?. . . Non-deterministic choice!

Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible

Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible: s • ⟨t, u⟩ → ⟨s • t, s • u⟩

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1

But they are observationally equivalent!

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1

But they are observationally equivalent!

Theorem (Generalized linearity)

t(u + v ) ∼ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ∼ a • (tu)

We can asign probabilities to the non-deterministic reductions of match⊙

Definition (Classical output of the measurement)

Definition (The four boolean functions)

Definition (The four boolean functions)

where M0 , M1 , M2 , and M3 are the proofs of 1 ⊸ Q2

M0 = λs.(s;if (f 0) [[1.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 1.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]])

Deutsch = λf .meas′2 ((H ⊗ I ) (U f | + −⟩))

Definition (Category SMS ) Theorem

J1K = S J0K = {∗}

Theorem (Soundness) Theorem (Adequacy)

ξ((a1 , a2 ) +A×A (a3 , a4 )) = ξ(a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 ) = {a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 }

ξ((a1 , a2 ) +A×A (a3 , a4 )) = ξ(a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 ) = {a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 }

ξ((a1 , a2 ) +A×A (a3 , a4 )) = ξ(a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 ) = {a1 +A a3 , a2 +A a4 }

∆ = ⟨id, id⟩ ∇ = [id, id]

∆pq = ⟨p̂, q̂⟩ ∇pq = [p̂, q̂]

∆pq = ⟨p̂, q̂⟩ ∇pq = [p̂, q̂]

JA ⊙ BK = JAK × JBK Γ⊢t :A⊙B x : A, ∆ ⊢ u : C y : B, ∆ ⊢ v : C

t⊗id d u×v ∇pq

JA ⊙ BK = JAK × JBK Γ⊢t :A⊙B x : A, ∆ ⊢ u : C y : B, ∆ ⊢ v : C

t⊗id d u×v ∇pq

The ⊙ connective as a non-harmonious connective in PL and IMALL

The L⊙C -calculus is suitable for quantum computing

Novel approach for non-determinism in a category with biproducts,

Alejandro Díaz-Caro Sup: A logical connective for non-determinism Summarizing Slide 21 / 21

You might also like