{"title":"系统F中的自然项","authors":"J. D. Lataillade","doi":"10.1109/LICS.2009.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We provide in this article two characterisation results, describing exactly which terms verify the dinaturality diagram, in Church-style system F and in Curry-style system F. The proof techniques we use here are purely syntactic, giving in particular a direct construction of the two terms generated by the dinaturality diagram. But the origin of these techniques lies in fact directly on the analysis of system F through game semantics. Thus, this article provides an example of backward engineering, where powerful syntactic results can be extracted from a semantic analysis.","PeriodicalId":415902,"journal":{"name":"2009 24th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic In Computer Science","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dinatural Terms in System F\",\"authors\":\"J. D. Lataillade\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/LICS.2009.30\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We provide in this article two characterisation results, describing exactly which terms verify the dinaturality diagram, in Church-style system F and in Curry-style system F. The proof techniques we use here are purely syntactic, giving in particular a direct construction of the two terms generated by the dinaturality diagram. But the origin of these techniques lies in fact directly on the analysis of system F through game semantics. Thus, this article provides an example of backward engineering, where powerful syntactic results can be extracted from a semantic analysis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":415902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2009 24th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic In Computer Science\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2009 24th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic In Computer Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS.2009.30\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2009 24th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic In Computer Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS.2009.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
We provide in this article two characterisation results, describing exactly which terms verify the dinaturality diagram, in Church-style system F and in Curry-style system F. The proof techniques we use here are purely syntactic, giving in particular a direct construction of the two terms generated by the dinaturality diagram. But the origin of these techniques lies in fact directly on the analysis of system F through game semantics. Thus, this article provides an example of backward engineering, where powerful syntactic results can be extracted from a semantic analysis.