Paper detail

Metric Reasoning about $λ$-Terms: the Affine Case (Long Version)

Terms of Church's $λ$-calculus can be considered equivalent along many different definitions, but context equivalence is certainly the most direct and universally accepted one. If the underlying calculus becomes probabilistic, however, equivalence is too discriminating: terms which have totally unrelated behaviours are treated the same as terms which behave very similarly. We study the problem of evaluating the distance between affine $λ$-terms. The most natural definition for it, namely a natural generalisation of context equivalence, is shown to be characterised by a notion of trace distance, and to be bounded from above by a coinductively defined distance based on the Kantorovich metric on distributions. A different, again fully-abstract, tuple-based notion of trace distance is shown to be able to handle nontrivial examples.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.