Intersection types and lambda models, Theoretical Computer Science, vol.355, issue.2, pp.108-126, 2006. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.tcs.2006.01.004
URL : http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2006.01.004
Checking polynomial time complexity with types, IFIP TCS of IFIP Conference Proceedings, pp.370-382, 2002. ,
A filter lambda model and the completeness of type assignment, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol.37, issue.04, pp.931-940, 1983. ,
DOI : 10.1002/malq.19800261902
A semantics for lambda calculi with resources, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, vol.9, issue.4, pp.437-482, 1999. ,
DOI : 10.1017/S0960129599002893
Exact bounds for lengths of reductions in typed lambda-calculus, J. of Symbolic Logic, vol.66, issue.3, pp.1277-1285, 2001. ,
Complexity of strongly normalising ?-terms via nonidempotent intersection types, Proc. of the 14th Int. Conf. on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures (FOSSACS'11), 2011. ,
Non-idempotent intersection types, orthogonality and filter models -long version, 2011. ,
Soft lambda-Calculus: A Language for Polynomial Time Computation, p.312015, 2003. ,
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-540-24727-2_4
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00085129
A new type assignment for lambda-terms. Archiv für mathematische Logik und Grundlagenforschung, pp.139-156, 1978. ,
A proof of strong normalisation using domain theory. Logic, Methods Comput. Science, vol.3, issue.4, 2007. ,
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00432490
Intersection Types for Light Affine Lambda Calculus, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol.136, pp.133-152, 2005. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.entcs.2005.06.011
Execution time of lambda-terms via denotational semantics and intersection types, p.4251, 2009. ,
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00319822
Compositional characterizations of lambda-terms using intersection types (extended abstract), MFCS: Symp. on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, 2000. ,
Disjunctive Tautologies as Synchronisation Schemes, Proc. of the 9th Annual Conf. of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL'00), volume 1862 of LNCS, pp.292-301, 2000. ,
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-44622-2_19
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.22.2792
The differential lambda-calculus, Theoretical Computer Science, vol.309, issue.1-3, pp.1-41, 2003. ,
DOI : 10.1016/S0304-3975(03)00392-X
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00150572
Strong normalization and typability with intersection types, Notre Dame J. Formal Loigc, vol.37, issue.1, pp.44-52, 1996. ,
Interprétation fonctionelle et élimination des coupures de l'arithmétique d'ordre supérieur, Thèse d'état, 1972. ,
Linear logic, Theoret. Comput. Sci, vol.50, issue.1, pp.1-101, 1987. ,
A soft type assignment system for lambda -calculus, Proc. of the 16th Annual Conf. of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL'07), pp.253-267, 2007. ,
Typed lambda-calculus in classical Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, Arch. Math. Log, vol.40, issue.3, pp.189-205, 2001. ,
Principality and decidable type inference for finite-rank intersection types, Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages , POPL '99, pp.161-174, 1999. ,
DOI : 10.1145/292540.292556
Soft linear logic and polynomial time, Theoret. Comput. Sci, vol.318, issue.12, pp.163-180, 2004. ,
Typing and computational properties of lambda expressions, Theoretical Computer Science, vol.44, issue.1, pp.51-68, 1986. ,
Classical <mml:math altimg="si1.gif" display="inline" overflow="scroll" xmlns:xocs="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/xocs/dtd" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/ja/dtd" xmlns:ja="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/ja/dtd" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:tb="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/common/table/dtd" xmlns:sb="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/common/struct-bib/dtd" xmlns:ce="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/common/dtd" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:cals="http://www.elsevier.com/xml/common/cals/dtd"><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>??</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math>, orthogonality and symmetric candidates, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol.153, issue.1-3, pp.3-20, 2008. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.apal.2008.01.005
Focalisation and Classical Realisability, Proc. of the 18th Annual Conf. of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL'09), pp.409-423, 2009. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0304-3975(87)90045-4
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00409793
Recursive Polymorphic Types and Parametricity in an Operational Framework, 20th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS' 05), pp.82-91, 2005. ,
DOI : 10.1109/LICS.2005.42
Types, potency, and idempotency: why nonlinearity and amnesia make a type system work, Proc. of the ACM Intern. Conf. on Functional Programming, pp.138-149, 2004. ,
DOI : 10.1145/1016850.1016871
Proofs of strong normalisation for second order classical natural deduction, J. of Symbolic Logic, vol.62, issue.4, pp.1461-1479, 1997. ,
Complexity of normalization in the pure typed lambda calculus, The L. E. J. Brouwer Centenary Symposium. North-Holland, 1982. ,
A realizability interpretation of the theory of species, Logic Colloquium vB95 S. van Bakel. Intersection Type Assignment Systems, pp.240-251385, 1975. ,
Embedding a Second-Order Type System into an Intersection Type System, Information and Computation, vol.117, issue.2, pp.206-220, 1995. ,
DOI : 10.1006/inco.1995.1040
Hence, there exist ? 1 , ? 2 and A such that ? 1 ? M : A ? F and ? 2 ? N : A and ? = ? 1 ? ? 2 . So ? ? ? 1 , and ? 1 ? ?. Hence, A ? F ? M ? . We also have A ? N ? . So we have F ? M ? @N ? . Conversely, let F ? M ? @N ? . There exists A such that A ? F ? M ? and A ? N ? . So there exists ? ? ? such that ? ? M : A ? F and there exists ? ? ? such that ,
There exists A ? u such that A ? F ? ?x.M ? . So there exists ? ? ? such that ? ? ?x.M : A ? F . Hence, there exists U such that ,
There exists ? ? (?, x ? u) such that then there exist ? 1 ? ? and A ? u such that ? = ? 1 , x : A (using Lemma 10.1) So we have ? 1 ? ?x.M : A ? F , and then A ? F ? ?x.M ? . Hence, we have F ? ?x.M ? @u, then for all y ? Dom(?), y = x (using Lemma 10.1). So ? ? ? and ?, x : ? ? M : F . Since u is a value ,
By induction on the derivation of G S M : A. Let ? be a valuation ,