A categorical setting for lower complexity

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

Volumn 265, Issue C, 2010, Pages 277-300

  Cockett, Robin ^a   Redmond, Brian F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

complexity; fibrations; Polarized categories; recursion principles

Indexed keywords

CARTESIANS; COMPLEXITY; COMPUTATIONAL SETTINGS; FIBRATIONS; LOWER COMPLEXITY; POLARIZED CATEGORIES; RECURSIONS;

COMPUTER SCIENCE;

EID: 77956369673     PISSN: 15710661     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.entcs.2010.08.017     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. J-M. Andreoli. Focussing and proof construction. Ann. Pure and Applied Logic, 107(1) (2001) 131-163.
2. S. Bellantoni & S. Cook. A new recursion-theoretic characterization of the polytime functions. Computational Complexity, 2:97-110, 1992.
3. M.J. Burrell. Pola project page. http://projects.wizardlike.ca/projects/ pola.
4. R. Cockett & R. Seely. Polarized category theory, modules and game semantics. Theory and Application of Categories, 18 (2007) 4-101.
5. R. Cockett & D. Spencer. Strong Categorical Datatypes I. International Meeting on Category Theory 1991, AMS, Canadian Mathematical Society Proceedings, 1992.
6. J-Y Girard. A new constructive logic: classical logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 1(3) (1991) 255-296.
7. M. Hamano & P. Scott. A Categorical Semantics for Polarized MALL. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 145 (2007) 276-313.
8. C. Hermida & B. Jacobs. Structural induction and coinduction in a fibrational setting. Information and Computation, 145(2) (1998) 107-152.
9. M. Hofmann & U. Dal Lago. Quantitative Models and Implicit Complexity. FSTTCS 2005: Proceedings of Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, Hyderabad, India Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3821 (2005) 189-200.
10. M. Hofmann. Type systems for polynomial-time computation. Habilitation thesis, University of Darmstadt, 1999.
11. M. Hofmann. Linear types and non-size-increasing polynomial time computation. Information and Computation, 183(1) (2003) 57-85.
12. Neil Immerman, Guest Column: Progress in Descriptive Complexity, SIGACT NEWS 36(4) (2005) 24-35.
13. A. Kock. Strong Functors and Monoidal Monads. Archiv der Math. 23: 113120, 1972.
14. Olivier Laurent. Etude de la polarisation en logique, Universite Aix-Marseille II, These de Doctorat (2002).
15. Olivier Laurent. Polarized Games. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic no 1-3, Vol.130 (2004) 79-123.
16. D. Leivant. Stratified Functional Programs and Computational Complexity. In Proc. 20th IEEE Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, (1993) 325-333.
17. D. Leivant & J.-Y. Marion. Ramified Recurrence and Computational Complexity II: Substitution and Poly-space. In Proc. CSL'94, Springer LNCS, 933 (1994) 486-500.
18. J. Otto. Complexity Doctrines. Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1995.
19. R. Pare & L. Roman. Monoidal categories with natural numbers object. Studia Logica, 48(3) (1989) 361-376.
20. B. Redmond & R. Cockett & M. Burrell. Safe Recursion Revisited: Categorical Semantics and Type Systems for Lower Complexity. Submitted to FICS2010. Available at: http://projects.wizardlike.ca/projects/pola.
21. L. Santocanale. A calculus of circular proofs and its categorical semantics. Proc. FOSSACS 2002, Springer LNCS, No.2303, 2002.
22. V. Vene. Categorical programming with inductive and coinductive types. PhD thesis, University of Tartu, 2000.
23. Richard J. Wood, Indicial methods for relative categories. PhD Thesis, Dalhousie University, 1976.