MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969568901 · doi:10.23638/lmcs-17(2:9)2021

LNL-FPC: The Linear/Non-linear Fixpoint Calculus

2021· preprint· en· W2969568901 on OpenAlexaff
Bert Lindenhovius, Michael Mislove, Vladimir Zamdzhiev

Bibliographic record

VenueLogical Methods in Computer Science · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchMultidisciplinary University Research InitiativeAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsRecursion (computer science)Linear programmingLinear logicCategorical variableType theoryType (biology)Computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a type system with mixed linear and non-linear recursive types called LNL-FPC (the linear/non-linear fixpoint calculus). The type system supports linear typing, which enhances the safety properties of programs, but also supports non-linear typing as well, which makes the type system more convenient for programming. Just as in FPC, we show that LNL-FPC supports type-level recursion, which in turn induces term-level recursion. We also provide sound and computationally adequate categorical models for LNL-FPC that describe the categorical structure of the substructural operations of Intuitionistic Linear Logic at all non-linear types, including the recursive ones. In order to do so, we describe a new technique for solving recursive domain equations within cartesian categories by constructing the solutions over pre-embeddings. The type system also enjoys implicit weakening and contraction rules that we are able to model by identifying the canonical comonoid structure of all non-linear types. We also show that the requirements of our abstract model are reasonable by constructing a large class of concrete models that have found applications not only in classical functional programming, but also in emerging programming paradigms that incorporate linear types, such as quantum programming and circuit description programming languages.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLogical Methods in Computer ScienceSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207