Talk Given at Nancy

From Intuitionistic Linear Logic
to Quantum computing
Alejandro Díaz-Caro
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE QUILMES
& CONICET / UNIVERSIDAD de BUENOS AIRES
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Joint work with Gilles Dowek
Seminaire de l’équipe QUACS @ Université Paris-Saclay

May 24, 2023 – Saclay, France
Linear Logic and Linear functions
Motivation
[ADC & Gilles Dowek – FSCD 2022 & Extended version at arXiv:2201.11221, 2023]
Linear Logic ←→ Linear Algebra
Linearity expressed by its models (linear maps)
Lambda-calculus is the language of functions
Linear lambda-calculus is the language of linear functions
Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 1 / 20

Motivation
[ADC & Gilles Dowek – FSCD 2022 & Extended version at arXiv:2201.11221, 2023]
Linear Logic ←→ Linear Algebra
Linearity expressed by its models (linear maps)
Lambda-calculus is the language of functions
Linear lambda-calculus is the language of linear functions
But, how?
Linear in the algebraic sense. . .
f (v + w ) = f (v ) + f (w )
f (a.v ) = a.f (v )
This is not easily expressible with lambda-terms

Interstitial rules
Addition and multiplication by scalar
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ A sum Γ ⊢ A prod
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A

Interstitial rules
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
Now some proofs cannot be reduced, e.g.
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&
Γ ⊢ A & B prodi
Γ ⊢ A&B
&e
Γ⊢A

Interstitial rules
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
Now some proofs cannot be reduced, e.g.
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&
Γ ⊢ A & B prodi
Γ ⊢ A&B
&e
Γ⊢A
Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

π1 π2 π1 π2
Γ ⊢ A prod Γ ⊢ B prod Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&i
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ ⊢ A&B
&i &e
Γ ⊢ A&B Γ ⊢ A prod
&e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A
We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible

The LS -calculus
Intuitionistic linear logic connectives
Mult Add PL
Truth 1 ⊤ ⊤
Falsehood 0 ⊥
Implication ⊸ ⇒
Conjunction ⊗ & ∧
Disjunction ⊕ ∨

The LS -calculus
Intuitionistic linear logic connectives
Mult Add PL
Truth 1 ⊤ ⊤
Falsehood 0 ⊥
Implication ⊸ ⇒
Conjunction ⊗ & ∧
Disjunction ⊕ ∨
Proof-terms (a is scalar from some semiring (S, +, ·))
introductions eliminations connective
t =x |t +t |a•t | a.⋆ | t;t (1)
| λx.t | tt (⊸)
|t ⊗t | let x ⊗ y = t in t (⊗)
| ⟨⟩ (⊤)
| err(t) (0)
| ⟨t, t⟩ | π1 (t) | π2 (t) (&)
| inl(t) | inr(t) | match t {(x 7→ t) (y 7→ t)} (⊕)
The LS -calculus
Some rules
Some deduction rules
1i (a) Γ ⊢ t : 1 ∆ ⊢ u : A 1e Γ ⊢ t : A Γ ⊢ u : A sum Γ ⊢ t : A prod(a)

⊢ a.⋆ : 1 Γ, ∆ ⊢ t;u : A Γ⊢t +u :A Γ⊢a•t :A
Γ⊢t:A ∆⊢u:B ⊗ Γ ⊢ t : A ⊗ B ∆, x : A, y : B ⊢ u : C
i ⊗e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ t ⊗ u : A ⊗ B Γ, ∆ ⊢ let x ⊗ y = t in u : C
Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B Γ ⊢ t : A&B Γ ⊢ t : A&B
&i &e1 &e2
Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B Γ ⊢ π1 (t) : A Γ ⊢ π2 (t) : B
Some reduction rules
(a.⋆);t−→ a•t
a. ⋆ + b.⋆−→ (a + b).⋆
a • b.⋆−→ (a · b).⋆

The LS -calculus
Some rules

⊢ a.⋆ : 1 Γ, ∆ ⊢ t;u : A Γ⊢t +u :A Γ⊢a•t :A
i ⊗e
&i &e1 &e2
Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B Γ ⊢ π1 (t) : A Γ ⊢ π2 (t) : B
Some reduction rules π1 π2 π3 π4
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&i &
Γ ⊢ A&B Γ ⊢ A & B sumi
(a.⋆);t−→ a•t Γ ⊢ A&B
a. ⋆ + b.⋆−→ (a + b).⋆
a • b.⋆−→ (a · b).⋆ π1 π3 π2 π4
⟨t1 , t2 ⟩+⟨u1 , u2 ⟩−→ ⟨t1 +u2 , t2 +u2 ⟩ −→ Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ A sum Γ ⊢ B Γ ⊢ B sum
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B
&i
Γ ⊢ A&B

The LS -calculus
Some rules

⊢ a.⋆ : 1 Γ, ∆ ⊢ t;u : A Γ⊢t +u :A Γ⊢a•t :A
i ⊗e
&i &e1 &e2
Γ ⊢ ⟨t, u⟩ : A & B Γ ⊢ π1 (t) : A Γ ⊢ π2 (t) : B
Some reduction rules π1 π2 π3 π4
Γ1 ⊢ A ∆1 ⊢ B Γ 2 ⊢ A ∆2 ⊢ B
⊗i ⊗i
Ξ⊢A⊗B Ξ⊢A⊗B
(a.⋆);t−→ a•t sum
Ξ⊢A⊗B
a. ⋆ + b.⋆−→ (a + b).⋆
a • b.⋆−→ (a · b).⋆ Ξ = Γ1 , ∆1 = Γ2 , ∆2
⟨t1 , t2 ⟩+⟨u1 , u2 ⟩−→ ⟨t1 +u2 , t2 +u2 ⟩
let x ⊗ y = (t + u) in v −→ (let x ⊗ y = t in v ) + (let x ⊗ y = u in v )

Vectors
Definition (The set V)

1 ∈ V, If A, B ∈ V, A&B ∈ V A ∈ V, d(A) = number of 1
Definition (One-to-one correspondance) Example

n
A ∈ V with d(A) = n ←→ S a
⟨⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩, c.⋆⟩ ↔ b
⊢ t : A (t irreductible) −→ unique vector t ∈ S n | {z } c
|{z}
(1 & 1) & 1
v ∈ S n −→ unique irreductible proof vA S3
Lemma (Vector operations)

t +u =t +u
a • t = at

A vector space of terms
If (S, +, ·) is a field. . .
Definition (Equivalence)
t≡r iff ∃s s.t. t →∗ v ∗← r .
Definition (Null vector)

If A = 1, 0A = 0.⋆
0A proof of A ∈ V, defined by
If A = A1 & A2 , 0A = ⟨0A1 , 0A2 ⟩
Theorem (Vector space)

If A ∈ V and t, t1 , t2 , and t3 are closed proofs of A, then
1. (t1 + t2 ) + t3 ≡ t1 + (t2 + t3 ) 5. a • b • t ≡ (a · b) • t
2. t1 + t2 ≡ t2 + t1 6. 1 • t ≡ t
3. t + 0A ≡ t 7. a • (t1 + t2 ) ≡ a • t1 + a • t2
4. t + (−1) • t ≡ 0A 8. (a + b) • t ≡ a • t + b • t
Matrices
Theorem (Matrices)

A, B ∈ V 

d(A) = m

⇒∃ ⊢t:A⇒B s.t. ∀v ∈ S m tvA = Mv
d(B) = n 

M ∈ S m×n

Example
a b

c d is expressed as t = λx.((π1 (x);⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩) + (π2 (x);⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩))

Matrices
Theorem (Matrices)

A, B ∈ V 

d(A) = m

⇒∃ ⊢t:A⇒B s.t. ∀v ∈ S m tvA = Mv
d(B) = n 

M ∈ S m×n

Example
a b

c d is expressed as t = λx.((π1 (x);⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩) + (π2 (x);⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩))

t ⟨e.⋆, f .⋆⟩ → π1 ⟨e.⋆, f .⋆⟩;⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩ + π2 ⟨e.⋆, f .⋆⟩;⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩
→∗ (e.⋆);⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩ + (f .⋆);⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩

→∗ e • ⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩ + f • ⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩

∗
→ ⟨ae.⋆, be.⋆⟩ + ⟨cf .⋆, df .⋆⟩
→∗ ⟨(ae + cf ).⋆, (be + df ).⋆⟩

Linearity. The main theorem
Theorem (Linearity)
Let A be any proposition, B ∈ V, ⊢ t : A ⊸ B, and u, v ∈ A, then
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

Theorem (Linearity)
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1
t(1. ⋆ + 2.⋆) −→∗ λy .y 3.⋆ (t1.⋆) + (t2.⋆) −→∗ λy .(y 1.⋆) + (y 2.⋆)
But they are observationally equivalent!

Theorem (Linearity)
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
t(1. ⋆ + 2.⋆) −→∗ λy .y 3.⋆ (t1.⋆) + (t2.⋆) −→∗ λy .(y 1.⋆) + (y 2.⋆)

Let t1 , t2 proof of A t1 ∼ t2
if ∀B ∈ V and ∀c s.t. x : A ⊢ c : B, we have (t1 /x)c ≡ (t2 /x)c

Theorem (Linearity)
t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)
t(1. ⋆ + 2.⋆) −→∗ λy .y 3.⋆ (t1.⋆) + (t2.⋆) −→∗ λy .(y 1.⋆) + (y 2.⋆)

Let t1 , t2 proof of A t1 ∼ t2
if ∀B ∈ V and ∀c s.t. x : A ⊢ c : B, we have (t1 /x)c ≡ (t2 /x)c
Theorem (Generalized linearity)

Let A, B be any propositions, ⊢ t : A ⊸ B, and u, v ∈ A, then
t(u + v ) ∼ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ∼ a • (tu)

Linearity
Corollary
Let A, B ∈ V, d(A) = m, d(B) = n, and ⊢ t : A ⊸ B, then
F : Sm → Sn
u 7→ tu A
is linear.

The ⊙ connective: adding some non-determinism
Harmony
With generalized elimination rules
Example 1
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ∧ Γ ⊢ A ∧ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ ⊢ A ∧ B Γ, B ⊢ C
i ∧e1 ∧e2
Γ⊢A∧B Γ⊢C Γ⊢C
π1 π2
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ∧ π3
i −→ (π1 /A)π3
Γ⊢A∧B Γ, A ⊢ C
∧e1
Γ⊢C
Example 2
Γ⊢A ∨ Γ⊢B ∨ Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C

i1 i2 ∨e
Γ⊢A∨B Γ⊢A∨B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A ∧ π2 π3
i1 −→ (π1 /A)π2
Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
∧e
Γ⊢C
Not harmony
Insufficiency [Prior 1960]
Γ⊢A Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonki tonke
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A π2
tonki
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonke
Γ⊢C

Not harmony
Insufficiency [Prior 1960]
Γ⊢A Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonki tonke
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ⊢C
π1
Γ⊢A π2
tonki
Γ ⊢ A tonk B Γ, B ⊢ C
tonke
Γ⊢C
Excessiveness
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ B ⌣i Γ ⊢ A ⌣ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⌣e
Γ⊢A⌣B Γ⊢C
π1 π2
Γ ⊢ A Γ ⊢ B ⌣i π3 π4 (π1 /A)π3
Γ⊢A⌣B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⌣e (π2 /A)π4
Γ⊢C

⊙ connective
[ADC & G. Dowek, ICTAC 2021 & TCS 2023]
In PL
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ ⊢ A ⊙ B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ ⊢ A ⊙ B Γ, B ⊢ C Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢C Γ⊢C Γ⊢C

⊙ connective
In PL
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ⊢C

⊙ connective
In PL
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢B Γ⊢C
In LL, an additive connective

Γ⊢A Γ⊢B ⊙
i
Γ⊢A⊙B
Γ⊢A⊙B Γ⊢A⊙B Γ ⊢ A ⊙ B ∆, A ⊢ C ∆, B ⊢ C
⊙e1 ⊙e2 ⊙e
Γ⊢A Γ⊢A Γ, ∆ ⊢ C

The L⊙S -calculus
Deduction rules
Γ⊢t:A Γ⊢u:B ⊙
i
Γ ⊢ [t, u] : A ⊙ B
Γ⊢t :A⊙B Γ⊢t :A⊙B
⊙e1 ⊙e2
Γ ⊢ π1⊙ (t) : A Γ ⊢ π2⊙ (t) : B
Γ⊢t :A⊙B ∆, x : A ⊢ u : C ∆, y : B ⊢ v : C
⊙
⊙e
Γ, ∆ ⊢ match t {(x 7→ u) (y 7→ v )} : C
Reduction rules
π1⊙ [t, u] → t Remark:
{⊙i , ⊙e1 , ⊙e2 } = {&1 , &e1 , &e2 }
π2⊙ [t, u] → u
⊙
match [t, u] {(x 7→ v ) (y 7→ w )} → (t/x)v New set V:
match⊙ [t, u] {(x 7→ v ) (y 7→ w )} → (u/y )w 1∈V
[t, u] + [v , w ] → [t + v , u + w ] If A, B ∈ V, A ⊙ B ∈ V
a • [t, u] → [a • t, a • u]

Measurement in the L⊙C -calculus
Preliminaires
Definition (Qubits: Qn )
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
Let t closed irreductible proof of Qn .
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2

Preliminaires
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2
u
Convention u closed irreductible proof of Qn =⇒ alternative expression of the n-qubit ∥u∥ .
Example: √12 |0⟩ + √12 |1⟩ can be expressed by [ √12 .⋆, √12 .⋆] or by [1.⋆, 1.⋆].

Preliminaires
Q0 = 1 Qn+1 = Qn ⊙ Qn
Definition (Norm)
▶ If n = 0, t = a.⋆ ∥t∥2 = |a|2
▶ If n = n′ + 1, t = [t1 , t2 ] ∥t∥2 = ∥t1 ∥2 + ∥t2 ∥2
u
Convention u closed irreductible proof of Qn =⇒ alternative expression of the n-qubit ∥u∥ .
Example: √12 |0⟩ + √12 |1⟩ can be expressed by [ √12 .⋆, √12 .⋆] or by [1.⋆, 1.⋆].
We can asign probabilities to the non-deterministic reductions of match⊙

Definition (Measurement of n qubits)
measn = λx.match⊙ x {(y 7→ [y , 0Qn−1 ]) (z 7→ [0Qn−1 , z])} ⊢ measn : Qn ⊸ Qn

Definition (Bits: B)
B=1⊕1 0 = inl(1.⋆) 1 = inr(1.⋆)
Convention Proofs of bits are taken modulo normalization.
a • 0 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 0 a • 1 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 1

Definition (Bits: B)
B=1⊕1 0 = inl(1.⋆) 1 = inr(1.⋆)
Convention Proofs of bits are taken modulo normalization.
a • 0 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 0 a • 1 with a ̸= 0 represents the Boolean 1
Definition (Classical output of the measurement)

meas′1 = λx.match⊙ x {(y 7→ y ;0) (z 7→ z;1)} ⊢ meas′1 : Qn ⊸ B
Example
meas′1 [a.⋆, b.⋆]
2
|b|2
Reduces to a.0 with probability |a|2|a|
+|b|2 Reduces to b.1 with probability |a|2 +|b|2

Example: Deutsch’s algorithm
Preliminaires
Definition (The four boolean functions)

if = λx.λy .λz.match x {(w1 7→ w1 ;y ) (w2 7→ w2 ;z)} ⊢ if : B ⊸ A ⊸ A ⊸ A
if 0 u v → 1 • u if 1 u v → 1 • v
The four Boolean functions mapping 0 to a and 1 to b are λx.if x a b

Preliminaires
Definition (The four boolean functions)

if = λx.λy .λz.match x {(w1 7→ w1 ;y ) (w2 7→ w2 ;z)} ⊢ if : B ⊸ A ⊸ A ⊸ A
if 0 u v → 1 • u if 1 u v → 1 • v
The four Boolean functions mapping 0 to a and 1 to b are λx.if x a b
Definition (⊢ U : (B ⊸ B) ⊸ Q2 ⊸ Q2 )

⊙ ⊙
U = λf .λq. M0 π1 (π1 q) + M1 π2⊙ (π1⊙ q) + M2 π1⊙ (π2⊙ q) +
⊙ ⊙
M3 π2 (π2 q)
where M0 , M1 , M2 , and M3 are the proofs of 1 ⊸ Q2
M0 = λs.(s;if (f 0) [[1.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 1.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]])

M1 = λs.(s;if (f 0) [[0.⋆, 1.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[1.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 0.⋆]])
M2 = λs.(s;if (f 1) [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [1.⋆, 0.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 1.⋆]])
M3 = λs.(s;if (f 1) [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [0.⋆, 1.⋆]] [[0.⋆, 0.⋆], [1.⋆, 0.⋆]])
Deutsch = λf .meas′2 ((H ⊗ I ) (U f | + −⟩))

⊢ Deutsch : (B ⊸ B) ⊸ B
Example
⊢f :B⊸B
▶ If f constant function, Deutsch f −→∗(1) a • 0, for some scalar a,
▶ If f if not constant, Deutsch f −→∗(1) a • 1 for some scalar a.

A categorical model of the LS -calculus
[ADC & O. Malherbe, draft at arXiv:2205.02142, 2022]
Definition (Cancellative semiring)

▶ (S, +) commutative monoid with identity 0
In particular {∗} is a
▶ (S, ·) commutative monoid with identity 1 cancellative semiring, with
▶ · distributes w.r.t. + 0=1=∗
▶ For any s ∈ S, 0 · s = 0
▶ Cancellative property: s1 + s = s2 + s implies s1 = s2
Definition (S-semimodule)
(A, +) commutative monoid with additive identity 0 and • : S × A → A satisfying:
(s · s ′ ) • a = s • (s ′ • a) 1•a=a
′ ′
s • (a + a ) = (s • a) + (s • a ) s •0=0•a=0
′ ′
(s + s ) • a = (s • a) + (s • a)

A categorical model of the LS -calculus
[ADC & O. Malherbe, draft at arXiv:2205.02142, 2022]
Definition (Category CSMS ) Theorem

Obj(CSMS ) = {A | A is a cancellative S-semimodule} CSMS is a symmetic monoidal closed
Arr(CSMS ) = {f | f is a S-homomorphism} category with product and coproduct
S = {∗} =⇒ non-deterministic calculus

+
S=R =⇒ probabilistic calculus
S=C =⇒ quantum calculus
J1K = S J0K = {∗}

JA ⊗ BK = JAK ⊗ JBK JA & BK = JAK × JBK
JA ⊸ BK = JBK JA ⊕ BK = JAK + JBK
JAK
J⊤K = {∗}

Summarizing
▶ We presented the LS -logic, an extension of intuitionistic linear logic with two interstitial
rules and its commuting rules to recover cut elimination.
▶ We have shown that its proof-language can express matrices in S m×n
▶ Moreover, we have shown that every term of type A ⊸ B is linear in the algebraic sense.
▶ We extended further with a non-harmonious connective: ⊙ (read “sup”).
▶ We have shown how to use its lack of harmony to encode the quantum measurement.
▶ Categorical model (semimodules over cancellative semirings).

Talk Given at Nancy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Talk Given at Nancy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Intuitionistic Linear Logic

Joint work with Gilles Dowek

Seminaire de l’équipe QUACS @ Université Paris-Saclay

Linear Logic ←→ Linear Algebra

Linearity expressed by its models (linear maps)

Lambda-calculus is the language of functions

Linear lambda-calculus is the language of linear functions

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 1 / 20

Linear Logic ←→ Linear Algebra

Linearity expressed by its models (linear maps)

Lambda-calculus is the language of functions

Linear lambda-calculus is the language of linear functions

This is not easily expressible with lambda-terms

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 1 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 2 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 2 / 20

Commute sum either with the intro or with the elim

We chose to commute with the introduction as much as possible

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 3 / 20

1i (a) Γ ⊢ t : 1 ∆ ⊢ u : A 1e Γ ⊢ t : A Γ ⊢ u : A sum Γ ⊢ t : A prod(a)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 4 / 20

1i (a) Γ ⊢ t : 1 ∆ ⊢ u : A 1e Γ ⊢ t : A Γ ⊢ u : A sum Γ ⊢ t : A prod(a)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 4 / 20

1i (a) Γ ⊢ t : 1 ∆ ⊢ u : A 1e Γ ⊢ t : A Γ ⊢ u : A sum Γ ⊢ t : A prod(a)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 4 / 20

Definition (The set V)

Definition (One-to-one correspondance) Example

Lemma (Vector operations)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 5 / 20

Definition (Null vector)

Theorem (Vector space)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 7 / 20

→∗ e • ⟨a.⋆, b.⋆⟩ + f • ⟨c.⋆, d.⋆⟩

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 7 / 20

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 8 / 20

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1

But they are observationally equivalent!

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 8 / 20

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1

But they are observationally equivalent!

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 8 / 20

t(u + v ) ≡ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ≡ a • (tu)

It does not extend directly to arbitrary B: Let t = λx.λy .yx : 1 ⊸ (1 ⊸ 1) ⊸ 1

But they are observationally equivalent!

Theorem (Generalized linearity)

t(u + v ) ∼ (tu) + (tv ) t(a • u) ∼ a • (tu)

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 9 / 20

Γ⊢A ∨ Γ⊢B ∨ Γ⊢A∨B Γ, A ⊢ C Γ, B ⊢ C

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 11 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 11 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 12 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 12 / 20

In LL, an additive connective

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 12 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 13 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 14 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 14 / 20

We can asign probabilities to the non-deterministic reductions of match⊙

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 14 / 20

Alejandro Díaz-Caro From Intuitionistic Linear Logic to Quantum computing 15 / 20