ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The complexity of parameter passing in polymorphic procedures
Full text PdfPdf (526 KB)
Source Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing archive
Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing table of contents
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Pages: 38 - 45  
Year of Publication: 1981
Author
Sponsor
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 14,   Citation Count: 3
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/800076.802455
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Our subject is at the confluence of two foundational research areas: formal independence results, and higher order data types. A central problem with polymorphism is the impact of involved polymorphic types on termination of program executions and on the complexity of types occurring therein. It is known thattermination of chains of procedure calls is guaranteed for all polymorphic procedures [5]; however, M. O'Donnell [16] and S. Fortune [4] have independently shown that this statement cannot be proved in usual (Peano's) first-order arithmetic, attesting to the potentially complex effect of polymorphic types. Our main result is that termination of polymorphic argument-passing is a statement that cannot be proved even in full (impredicative) second order arithmetic, a theory whose exceeding strength is briefly illustrated.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
A. Demers & J. Donahue, Revised report on Russell; Report TR 79-389, Computer Science Department, Cornell University, 1979.
2
3
 
4
S. Fortune, Topics in Complexity Theory; PhD Dissertation; Cornell University, 1979.
 
5
S. Fortune, D. Leivant & M. O'Donnell, The expressiveness of simple and second order type structures; IBM Research Report # (to appear elsewhere).
 
6
H. Friedman, PhD Dissertation; M.I.T., 1967.
 
7
H. Friedman, Borel Diagonalization and the incompleteness phenomena (preliminary report); The Ohio State university, 1980.
 
8
J.-Y. Girard, These de Doctorat d'Etat; Universite Paris VII, 1972.
 
9
W. A. Howard, The formula as type notion of construction; mimeographed notes, 1969.
10
11
 
12
G. Kreisel & A. Levy, Reflection principles and their use in establishing the complexity of axiomatic systems; Zeitschrift fur Math. Logik 14, 1968, 97-124.
 
13
D. Leivant, Unprovability of theorems of complexity theory in weak number theories; to appear in Theoretical Computer Science.
 
14
R.J. Lipton, Model theoretic aspects of complexity theory; Proceedings of the Nineteenth Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science, (1978) 176-188.
 
15
16
 
17
D. Prawitz, Natural Deduction; Uppsala, 1965.
 
18
R. Statman, PhD Dissertation; Stanford University, 1974.
 
19
G. Takeuti, Proof Theory; Amsterdam, 1975.
 
20
W. Wulf, R.L. London and M. Shaw, Abstraction and verification in ALPHARD—Introduction to language and methodology; Tech. Report, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1976.