Results 1  10
of
13
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 91 (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...
A Brief Guide to Linear Logic
, 1993
"... An overview of linear logic is given, including an extensive bibliography and a simple example of the close relationship between linear logic and computation. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 53 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
An overview of linear logic is given, including an extensive bibliography and a simple example of the close relationship between linear logic and computation.
Reasoning Theories  Towards an Architecture for Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems
, 1994
"... : Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems ..."
Abstract

Cited by 47 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
: Our ultimate goal is to provide a framework and a methodology which will allow users, and not only system developers, to construct complex reasoning systems by composing existing modules, or to add new modules to existing systems, in a "plug and play" manner. These modules and systems might be based on different logics; have different domain models; use different vocabularies and data structures; use different reasoning strategies; and have different interaction capabilities. This paper makes two main contributions towards our goal. First, it proposes a general architecture for a class of reasoning systems called Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems (OMRSs). An OMRS has three components: a reasoning theory component which is the counterpart of the logical notion of formal system, a control component which consists of a set of inference strategies, and an interaction component which provides an OMRS with the capability of interacting with other systems, including OMRSs and hum...
ConstantOnly Multiplicative Linear Logic is NPComplete
 Theoretical Computer Science
, 1992
"... Linear logic is a resourceaware logic that is based on an analysis of the classical proof rules of contraction (copying) and weakening (throwing away). In this paper we study the decision problem for the multiplicative fragment of linear logic without quantifiers or propositions: the constantonly ..."
Abstract

Cited by 30 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Linear logic is a resourceaware logic that is based on an analysis of the classical proof rules of contraction (copying) and weakening (throwing away). In this paper we study the decision problem for the multiplicative fragment of linear logic without quantifiers or propositions: the constantonly case. We show that this fragment is npcomplete. Earlier work by Max Kanovich showed that propositional multiplicative linear logic is npcomplete. With Natarajan Shankar, the first author developed a simplified proof for the propositional case. The structure of this simplified proof is utilized here with a new encoding which uses only constants. The end product is the somewhat surprising result that simply evaluating expressions in true, false, and, and or in multiplicative linear logic (\Omega , , 1, and ?) is npcomplete. By conservativity results not proven here, the nphardness of larger fragments of linear logic follows. 1 Introduction When Girard introduced linear logic [7], he bro...
Deciding Provability of Linear Logic Formulas
 Advances in Linear Logic
, 1994
"... Introduction There are many interesting fragments of linear logic worthy of study in their own right, most described by the connectives which they employ. Full linear logic includes all the logical connectives, which come in three dual pairs: the exponentials ! and ?, the additives & and \Phi, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 21 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Introduction There are many interesting fragments of linear logic worthy of study in their own right, most described by the connectives which they employ. Full linear logic includes all the logical connectives, which come in three dual pairs: the exponentials ! and ?, the additives & and \Phi, and the multiplicatives\Omega and . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . SRI International Computer Science Laboratory, Menlo Park CA 94025 USA. Work supported under NSF Grant CCR9224858. lincoln@csl.sri.com http://www.csl.sri.com/lincoln/lincoln.html Patrick Lincoln For the most part we will consider fragments of linear logic built up using these connectives in any combination. For example, full linear logic formulas may employ any connective, while multiplic
Chuâ€™s Construction: A Prooftheoretic Approach
 LOGIC FOR CONCURRENCY AND SYNCHRONISATIONâ€ť, KLUWER TRENDS IN LOGIC N.18, 2003, PP.93114. LAMBDA CALCULUS 37
, 2001
"... ..."
Yet another correctness criterion for Multiplicative Linear Logic with MIX
 In Logic at St Petersburg '94, Symposium on Logical Foundations of Computer Science, LNCS 813
, 1994
"... A new correctness criterion for discriminating Proof Nets among Proof Structures of Multiplicative Linear Logic with MIX rule is provided. This criterion is inspired by an original interpretation of Proof Structures as distributed systems, and logical formulae as processes. The computation inside a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A new correctness criterion for discriminating Proof Nets among Proof Structures of Multiplicative Linear Logic with MIX rule is provided. This criterion is inspired by an original interpretation of Proof Structures as distributed systems, and logical formulae as processes. The computation inside a system corresponds to the logical flow of information inside a proof, that is, roughly, a distributed version of Girard's token trip. Proof Nets are then characterised as deadlock free Proof Structures (deadlock free distributed systems). This result follows by considering the causal dependencies among logical formulae inside proofs, and it provides a new understanding of notions like acyclicity, chains, and empires in terms of concurrent computations. 1 Introduction Proof Structures and Proof Nets (see next section) have been one of the most innovative and provocative contribution of Girard's Linear Logic [Gi86]. They provide a nice, graphical representation for Logical Proofs (a sort of ...
Towards the Automation of the Design of Logic Programming Languages
 Department of Computer Science, RMIT
, 1997
"... Logic programs consist of formulas of mathematical logic and various prooftheoretic techniques can be used to design and analyse execution models for such programs. We briefly review the main problems, which are questions that are still elusive in the design of logic programming languages, from a p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Logic programs consist of formulas of mathematical logic and various prooftheoretic techniques can be used to design and analyse execution models for such programs. We briefly review the main problems, which are questions that are still elusive in the design of logic programming languages, from a prooftheoretic point of view. Existing approaches and analyses which lead to the various languages are all rather sophisticated and involve complex manipulations of proofs. All are designed for analysis on paper by a human and many of them are ripe for automation. We aim to perform the automation of some aspects of prooftheoretic analyses, in order to assist in the design of logic programming languages. In this paper we describe the first steps towards the design of such an automatic analysis tool. We investigate the usage of particular proof manipulations for the analysis of logic programming strategies. We propose a more precise specification of sequent calculi inference rules that we use ...