arXiv++ Combinatorics

The syntactic nature of logic and computation separates them from other fields of mathematics. Nevertheless, syntax has been the only way to adequately capture the dynamics of proofs and programs such as cut-elimination, and the finiteness and the atomicity of syntax are preferable for foundational aims as seen in Hilbert's program. Another issue is that a uniform basis for logic and computation has been missing, and this problem hampers a coherent view on them. For instance, formal proofs in proof theory are far from (ordinary) proofs of the validity of a formula in model theory. Our goal is to solve these fundamental problems by rebuilding central concepts in logic and computation such as formal systems, validity (in such a way that it coincides with the existence of proofs), cut-elimination and computability uniformly in terms of finite graphs based on game semantics. Unlike game semantics, however, we do not rely on anything infinite or extrinsic to the graphs. A key idea that enables our finitary, autonomous approach is the shift from graphs in game semantics to dynamic ones. The resulting combinatorics establishes a single, syntax-free, finitary framework that recasts formal systems admitting proofs with cuts, validity, the finest computational steps of cut-elimination and higher-order computability. This subsumes fully complete semantics of intuitionistic linear logic, which solves a problem open for thirty years, and even extends the full completeness to proofs with cuts. As a byproduct, our dynamic graphs give rise to Hopf algebras, which opens up new applications of algebras to logic and computation.

This work extends the present author's computational game semantics of Martin-Löf type theory to the cumulative hierarchy of universes. This extension completes game semantics of all standard types of Martin-Löf type theory for the first time in the 30 years history of modern game semantics. As a result, the powerful combinatorial reasoning of game semantics becomes available for the study of universes and types generated by them. A main challenge in achieving game semantics of universes comes from a conflict between identity types and universes: Naive game semantics of the encoding of an identity type by a universe induces a decision procedure on the equality between functions, a contradiction to a well-known fact in recursion theory. We overcome this problem by novel games for universes that encode games for identity types without deciding the equality.

In the present paper, based on the previous work (Part I), we present a game semantics for the intensional variant of intuitionistic type theory that refutes the principle of uniqueness of identity proofs and validates the univalence axiom, though we do not interpret non-trivial higher propositional equalities. Specifically, following the historic groupoid interpretation by Hofmann and Streicher, we equip predicative games in Part I with a groupoid structure, which gives rise to the notion of (predicative) gamoids. Roughly, gamoids are "games with (computational) equalities specified", which interpret subtleties in Id-types. We then formulate a category with families of predicative gamoids, equipped with dependent product, dependent sum, and Id-types as well as universes, which forms a concrete instance of the groupoid model. We believe that this work is an important stepping-stone towards a complete interpretation of homotopy type theory.

We present a game semantics for intuitionistic type theory. Specifically, we propose categories with families of a new variant of games and strategies for both extensional and intensional variants of the type theory with dependent function, dependent pair, and identity types as well as universes. Our games and strategies generalize the existing notion of games and strategies and achieve an interpretation of dependent types and the hierarchy of universes in an intuitive manner. We believe that it is a significant step towards a computational and intensional interpretation of the type theory.

The present paper gives a mathematical, in particular, syntax-independent, formulation of intensionality and dynamics of computation in terms of games and strategies. Specifically, we give a game semantics for a higher-order programming language that distinguishes programs with the same value yet different algorithms (or intensionality), equipped with the hiding operation on strategies that precisely corresponds to the (small-step) operational semantics (or dynamics) of the language. Categorically, our games and strategies give rise to a cartesian closed bicategory, and our game semantics forms an instance of a generalization of the standard interpretation of functional programming languages in cartesian closed categories. This work is intended to be the first step towards a mathematical (both categorical and game-semantic) foundation of intensional and dynamic aspects of logic and computation; our approach should be applicable to a wide range of logics and computations.