Results 1  10
of
15
Decision Problems for Propositional Linear Logic
, 1990
"... Linear logic, introduced by Girard, is a refinement of classical logic with a natural, intrinsic accounting of resources. We show that unlike most other propositional (quantifierfree) logics, full propositional linear logic is undecidable. Further, we prove that without the modal storage operator, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 90 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Linear logic, introduced by Girard, is a refinement of classical logic with a natural, intrinsic accounting of resources. We show that unlike most other propositional (quantifierfree) logics, full propositional linear logic is undecidable. Further, we prove that without the modal storage operator, which indicates unboundedness of resources, the decision problem becomes pspacecomplete. We also establish membership in np for the multiplicative fragment, npcompleteness for the multiplicative fragment extended with unrestricted weakening, and undecidability for certain fragments of noncommutative propositional linear logic. 1 Introduction Linear logic, introduced by Girard [14, 18, 17], is a refinement of classical logic which may be derived from a Gentzenstyle sequent calculus axiomatization of classical logic in three steps. The resulting sequent system Lincoln@CS.Stanford.EDU Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, and the Computer Science Labo...
The Undecidability of Second Order Multiplicative Linear Logic
, 1996
"... The multiplicative fragment of second order propositional linear logic is shown to be undecidable. Introduction Decision problems for propositional (quantifierfree) linear logic were first studied by Lincoln et al. [LMSS]. In referring to linear logic fragments, let M stand for multiplicatives, A ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The multiplicative fragment of second order propositional linear logic is shown to be undecidable. Introduction Decision problems for propositional (quantifierfree) linear logic were first studied by Lincoln et al. [LMSS]. In referring to linear logic fragments, let M stand for multiplicatives, A for additives, E for exponentials (or modalities), 1 for first order quantifiers, 2 for second order propositional quantifiers, and I for "intuitionistic" version. In [LMSS] it was shown that full propositional linear logic is undecidable and that MALL is PSPACEcomplete. The main problems left open in [LMSS] were the NPcompleteness of MLL, the decidability of MELL, and the decidability of various fragments of propositional linear logic without exponentials but extended with second order propositional quantifiers. The decision problem for MELL is still open, but almost all the other problems have been solved: ffl The NPcompleteness of MLL has been obtained by Kanovich [K1]. Moreover, Linco...
The Undecidability Of Second Order Linear Logic Without Exponentials
 Journal of Symbolic Logic
, 1995
"... . Recently, Lincoln, Scedrov and Shankar showed that the multiplicative fragment of second order intuitionistic linear logic is undecidable, using an encoding of second order intuitionistic logic. Their argument applies to the multiplicativeadditive fragment, but it does not work in the classical c ..."
Abstract

Cited by 12 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. Recently, Lincoln, Scedrov and Shankar showed that the multiplicative fragment of second order intuitionistic linear logic is undecidable, using an encoding of second order intuitionistic logic. Their argument applies to the multiplicativeadditive fragment, but it does not work in the classical case, because second order classical logic is decidable. Here we show that the multiplicativeadditive fragment of second order classical linear logic is also undecidable, using an encoding of twocounter machines originally due to Kanovich. The faithfulness of this encoding is proved by means of the phase semantics. In this paper, we write LL for the full propositional fragment of linear logic, MLL for the multiplicative fragment, MALL for the multiplicativeadditive fragment, and MELL for the multiplicativeexponential fragment. Similarly, we write ILL, IMLL, etc. for the fragments of intuitionistic linear logic, LL2, MLL2, etc. for the second order fragments of linear logic, and ILL2, IML...
Computing applicability conditions for plans with loops, in
 Proc. of the 20th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling
"... The utility of including loops in plans has been long recognized by the planning community. Loops in a plan help increase both its applicability and the compactness of representation. However, progress in finding such plans has been limited largely due to lack of methods for reasoning about the corr ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The utility of including loops in plans has been long recognized by the planning community. Loops in a plan help increase both its applicability and the compactness of representation. However, progress in finding such plans has been limited largely due to lack of methods for reasoning about the correctness and safety properties of loops of actions. We present novel algorithms for determining the applicability and progress made by a general class of loops of actions. These methods can be used for directing the search for plans with loops towards greater applicability while guaranteeing termination, as well as in postprocessing of computed plans to precisely characterize their applicability. Experimental results demonstrate the efficiency of these algorithms. 1.
In Defense Of Impenetrable Zombies
 Journal of Consciousness Studies
, 1995
"... Moody is right that the doctrine of conscious inessentialism (CI) is false. Unfortunately, his zombiebased argument against (CI), once made sufficiently clear to evaluate, is revealed as nothing but legerdemain. The fact is, though Moody hasfor reasons I explainconvinced himself otherwise, ce ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Moody is right that the doctrine of conscious inessentialism (CI) is false. Unfortunately, his zombiebased argument against (CI), once made sufficiently clear to evaluate, is revealed as nothing but legerdemain. The fact is, though Moody hasfor reasons I explainconvinced himself otherwise, certain zombies are impenetrable: that they are zombies, and not conscious beings like us, is something beyond the capacity of humans to divine. 1 Moody's Argument Moody's argument is imaginative, but not exactly rigorous: it's painfully difficult to identify his premises, and his inferences therefrom to the conclusion that conscious inessentialism (CI) is false. Charitable exegesis yields the following overarching reasoning: (1) If (CI) is true, then a group of zombies visiting us from a zombieworld would not bear a mark of zombiehood. (2) A group of zombies visiting us from a zombieworld would bear a mark of zombiehood. Therefore: (3) :(CI) I'm indebted to Larry Hauser for many stim...
A Note on Complexity of Constraint Interaction: Locality Conditions and Minimalist Grammars
, 2005
"... Locality Conditions (LCs) on (unbounded) dependencies have played a major role in the development of generative syntax ever since the seminal work by Ross [22]. Descriptively, they fall into two groups. On the one hand there are interventionbased LCs (ILCs) often formulated as “minimality constra ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Locality Conditions (LCs) on (unbounded) dependencies have played a major role in the development of generative syntax ever since the seminal work by Ross [22]. Descriptively, they fall into two groups. On the one hand there are interventionbased LCs (ILCs) often formulated as “minimality constraints” (“minimal link condition,” “minimize chain links,”“shortest move,” “attract closest,” etc.). On the other hand there are containmentbased LCs (CLCs) typically defined in terms of (generalized) grammatical functions (“adjunct island,” “subject island,” “specifier island,” etc.). Research on LCs has been dominated by two very general trends. First, attempts have been made at unifying ILCs and CLCs on the basis of notions such as “government ” and “barrier ” (e.g. [4]). Secondly, research has often been guided by the intuition that, beyond empirical coverage, LCs somehow contribute to restricting the formal capacity of grammars (cf. [3, p. 125], [6, p. 14f]). Both these issues, we are going to argue, can be fruitfully studied within the framework of minimalist
The Undecidability of Second Order Multiplicative Linear Logic
, 1996
"... The multiplicative fragment of second order propositional linear logic is shown to be undecidable. Introduction Decision problems for propositional (quantifierfree) linear logic were first studied by Lincoln et al. [LMSS]. In referring to linear logic fragments, let M stand for multiplicatives, A ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
The multiplicative fragment of second order propositional linear logic is shown to be undecidable. Introduction Decision problems for propositional (quantifierfree) linear logic were first studied by Lincoln et al. [LMSS]. In referring to linear logic fragments, let M stand for multiplicatives, A for additives, E for exponentials (or modalities), 1 for first order quantifiers, 2 for second order propositional quantifiers, and I for "intuitionistic" version. In [LMSS] it was shown that full propositional linear logic is undecidable and that MALL is PSPACEcomplete. The main problems left open in [LMSS] were the NPcompleteness of MLL, the decidability of MELL, and the decidability of various fragments of propositional linear logic without exponentials but extended with second order propositional quantifiers. The decision problem for MELL is still open, but almost all the other problems have been solved: ffl The NPcompleteness of MLL has been obtained by Kanovich [K1]. Moreover, Linco...
8 Two Type 0Variants of Minimalist Grammars
"... Minimalist grammars (Stabler 1997) capture some essential ideas about the basic operations of sentence construction in the Chomskyian syntactic tradition. Their affinity with the unformalized theories of working linguists makes it easier to implement and thereby to better understand the operations a ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Minimalist grammars (Stabler 1997) capture some essential ideas about the basic operations of sentence construction in the Chomskyian syntactic tradition. Their affinity with the unformalized theories of working linguists makes it easier to implement and thereby to better understand the operations appealed to in neatly accounting for some of the regularities perceived in language. Here we characterize the expressive power of two, apparently quite different, variations on the basic minimalist grammar framework, gotten by: 1. adding a mechanism of ‘feature percolation ’ (Kobele, forthcoming), or 2. instead of adding a central constraint on movement (the ‘specifier island condition’, Stabler 1999), using it to replace another one (the ‘shortest move condition’, Stabler 1997, 1999) (Gärtner and Michaelis 2005). We demonstrate that both variants have equal, unbounded, computing power by showing how each can simulate straightforwardly a 2counter automaton.
On the Expressivity of Two Refinements of Multiplicative Exponential Linear Logic ⋆
, 2009
"... Abstract. The decidability of multiplicative exponential linear logic (MELL) is currently open. I show that two independently interesting refinements of MELL that alter only the syntax of proofs—leaving the underlying truth untouched— are undecidable. The first refinement uses new modal connectives ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The decidability of multiplicative exponential linear logic (MELL) is currently open. I show that two independently interesting refinements of MELL that alter only the syntax of proofs—leaving the underlying truth untouched— are undecidable. The first refinement uses new modal connectives between the linear and the unrestricted judgments, and the second is based on focusing with priority assignments that conforms to a staging discipline. Both refinements can adequately encode the transitions of a tworegister Minsky machine. While neither refinement is weak enough to entail the undecidability of MELL, they show that no additive connectives are necessary for undecidability. 1