Abstract. MLL proof equivalence is the problem of deciding whether two proofs in multiplicative linear logic are related by a series of inference permutations. It is also known as the word problem for * -autonomous categories. Previous work has shown the problem to be equivalent to a rewiring problem on proof nets, which are not canonical for full MLL due to the presence of the two units. Drawing from recent work on reconfiguration problems, in this paper it is shown that MLL proof equivalence is PSPACE-complete, using a reduction from Nondeterministic Constraint Logic. An important consequence of the result is that the existence of a satisfactory notion of proof nets for MLL with units is ruled out (under current complexity assumptions). The PSPACE-hardness result extends to equivalence of normal forms in MELL without units, where the weakening rule for the exponentials induces a similar rewiring problem.

Classical proof forests are a proof formalism for first-order classical logic based on Herbrand's Theorem and backtracking games in the style of Coquand. First described by Miller in a cut-free setting as an economical representation of firstorder and higher-order classical proof, defining features of the forests are a strict focus on witnessing terms for quantifiers and the absence of inessential structure, or 'bureaucracy'. This paper presents classical proof forests as a graphical proof formalism and investigates the possibility of composing forests by cut-elimination. Cut-reduction steps take the form of a local rewrite relation that arises from the structure of the forests in a natural way. Yet reductions, which are significantly different from those of the sequent calculus, are combinatorially intricate and do not exclude the possibility of infinite reduction traces, of which an example is given. Cut-elimination, in the form of a weak normalisation theorem, is obtained using a modified version of the rewrite relation inspired by the game-theoretic interpretation of the forests. It is conjectured that the modified reduction relation is, in fact, strongly normalising.

An explicit-sharing lambda-calculus is presented, based on a Curry-Howard-style interpretation of the deep inference proof formalism. Duplication of subterms during reduction proceeds 'atomically', i.e. on individual constructors, similar to optimal graph reduction in the style of Lamping. The calculus preserves strong normalisation with respect to the lambdacalculus, and achieves fully lazy sharing.

Abstract-Additive linear logic, the fragment of linear logic concerning linear implication between strictly additive formulae, coincides with sum-product logic, the internal language of categories with free finite products and coproducts. Deciding equality of its proof terms, as imposed by the categorical laws, is complicated by the presence of the units (the initial and terminal objects of the category) and the fact that in a free setting products and coproducts do not distribute. The best known desicion algorithm, due to Cockett and Santocanale (CSL 2009), is highly involved, requiring an intricate case analysis on the syntax of terms.This paper provides canonical, graphical representations of the categorical morphisms, yielding a novel solution to this decision problem. Starting with (a modification of) existing proof nets, due to Hughes and Van Glabbeek, for additive linear logic without units, canonical forms are obtained by graph rewriting. The rewriting algorithm is remarkably simple. As a decision procedure for term equality it matches the known complexity of the problem. A main technical contribution of the paper is the substantial correctness proof of the algorithm.

Abstract-We investigate efficient algorithms for the additive fragment of linear logic. This logic is an internal language for categories with finite sums and products, and describes concurrent two-player games of finite choice. In the context of session types, typing disciplines for communication along channels, the logic describes the communication of finite choice along a single channel.We give a simple linear time correctness criterion for unit-free propositional additive proof nets via a natural construction on Petri nets. This is an essential ingredient to linear time complexity of the second author's combinatorial proofs for classical logic.For full propositional additive linear logic, including the units, we give a proof search algorithm that is linear-time in the product of the source and target formula, and an algorithm for proof net correctness that is of the same time complexity. We prove that proof search in first-order additive linear logic is NP-complete.