In this paper, we propose an approach to quantum λ-calculi. The ‘quantum data-classical control’ paradigm is considered. Starting from a measurement-free untyped quantum λ-calculus called Q, we will study standard properties such as confluence and subject reduction, and some good quantum properties. We will focus on the expressive power, analysing the relationship with other quantum computational models. Successively, we will add an explicit measurement operator to Q. On the resulting calculus, called Q*, we will propose a complete study of reduction sequences regardless of their finiteness, proving confluence results. Moreover, since the stronger motivation behind quantum computing is the research of new results in computational complexity, we will also propose a calculus which captures the three classes of quantum polytime complexity, showing an ICC-like approach in the quantum setting.

In the recent years, numerous proof systems have improved enough to be used for formally verifying non-trivial mathematical results. They, however, have different purposes and it is not always easy to choose which one is adapted to undertake a formalization effort. In this survey, we focus on properties related to real analysis: real numbers, arithmetic operators, limits, differentiability, integrability and so on. We have chosen to look into the formalizations provided in standard by the following systems: Coq, HOL4, HOL Light, Isabelle/HOL, Mizar, ProofPower-HOL, and PVS. We have also accounted for large developments that play a similar role or extend standard libraries: ACL2(r) for ACL2, C-CoRN/MathClasses for Coq, and the NASA PVS library. This survey presents how real numbers have been defined in these various provers and how the notions of real analysis described above have been formalized. We also look at the methods of automation these systems provide for real analysis.

In the concurrency theory, various semantic equivalences on transition systems are based on traces decorated with some additional observations, generally referred to as decorated traces. Using the generalized powerset construction, recently introduced by a subset of the authors (Silva et al.2010 FSTTCS. LIPIcs8 272–283), we give a coalgebraic presentation of decorated trace semantics. The latter include ready, failure, (complete) trace, possible futures, ready trace and failure trace semantics for labelled transition systems, and ready, (maximal) failure and (maximal) trace semantics for generative probabilistic systems. This yields a uniform notion of minimal representatives for the various decorated trace equivalences, in terms of final Moore automata. As a consequence, proofs of decorated trace equivalence can be given by coinduction, using different types of (Moore-) bisimulation (up-to context).

This paper deals with the specification problem in classical realizability (such as introduced by Krivine (2009 Panoramas et synthéses27)), which is to characterize the universal realizers of a given formula by their computational behaviour. After recalling the framework of classical realizability, we present the problem in the general case and illustrate it with some examples. In the rest of the paper, we focus on Peirce's law, and present two game-theoretic characterizations of its universal realizers. First, we consider the particular case where the language of realizers contains no extra instruction such as ‘quote’ (Krivine 2003 Theoretical Computer Science308 259–276). We present a first game $\mathds{G}$0 and show that the universal realizers of Peirce's law can be characterized as the uniform winning strategies for $\mathds{G}$0, using the technique of interaction constants. Then we show that in the presence of extra instructions such as ‘quote’, winning strategies for the game $\mathds{G}$0 are still adequate but no more complete. For that, we exhibit an example of a wild realizer of Peirce's law, that introduces a purely game-theoretic form of backtrack that is not captured by $\mathds{G}$0. We finally propose a more sophisticated game $\mathds{G}$1, and show that winning strategies for the game $\mathds{G}$1 are both adequate and complete in the general case, without any further assumption about the instruction set used by the language of classical realizers.

Simply typed λ-calculus with fixpoint combinators, λY-calculus, offers an interesting method for approximating program semantics. The Böhm tree of a λY-term represents the meaning of the program up to the meaning of built-in constants. It is much easier to reason about properties of such trees than properties of interpreted programs. Moreover, some interesting properties of programs are already expressible on the level of these trees.

Collapsible pushdown automata (CPDA) give another way of generating the same class of trees as λY-terms. We clarify the relationship between the two models. In particular, we present two relatively simple translations from λY-terms to CPDA using Krivine machines as an intermediate step. The latter are general machines for describing computation of the weak head normal form in the λ-calculus. They provide the notions of closure and environment that facilitate reasoning about computation.