A normalizing system of natural deduction for intuitionistic linear logic

 The main result of this paper is a normalizing system of natural deduction for the full language of intuitionistic linear logic. No explicit weakening or contraction rules for -formulas are needed. By the systematic use of general elimination rules a correspondence between normal derivations and cut-free derivations in sequent calculus is obtained. Normalization and the subformula property for normal derivations follow through translation to sequent calculus and cut-elimination. Received: 10 October 2000 / Revised version: 26 July 2001 / Published online: 2 September 2002 Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 03F52, 03F05 Keywords or phrases: Linear logic – Natural deduction – General elimination rules     

Aristotle’s Prototype Rule-Based Underlying Logic

This expository paper on Aristotle’s prototype underlying logic is intended for a broad audience that includes non-specialists. It requires as background a discussion of Aristotle’s demonstrative logic. Demonstrative logic or apodictics is the study of demonstration as opposed to persuasion. It is the subject of Aristotle’s two-volume Analytics, as its first sentence says. Many of Aristotle’s examples are geometrical. A typical geometrical demonstration requires a theorem that is to be demonstrated, known premises from which the theorem is to be deduced, and a deductive logic by which the steps of the deduction proceed. Every demonstration produces (or confirms) knowledge of (the truth of) its conclusion for every person who comprehends the demonstration. Aristotle presented a general truth-and-consequence theory of demonstration meant to apply to all demonstrations: a demonstration is an extended argumentation that begins with premises known to be truths and that involves a chain of reasoning showing by deductively evident steps that its conclusion is a consequence of its premises. In short, a demonstration is a deduction whose premises are known to be true. Aristotle’s general theory of demonstration required a prior general theory of deduction presented in the Prior Analytics. His general immediate-deduction-chaining theory of deduction was meant to apply to all deductions: any deduction that is not immediately evident is an extended argumentation that involves a chaining of immediately evident steps that shows its final conclusion to follow logically from its premises. His deductions, both direct and indirect, were rule-based and not tautology-based. The idea of tautology-based deduction, which dominated modern logic in the early years of the 1900s, is nowhere to be found in Analytics. Rule-based (or “natural”) deduction was rediscovered by modern logicians. To illustrate his general theory of deduction, Aristotle presented a prototype: an ingeniously simple and mathematically precise special case traditionally known as the categorical syllogistic. With reference only to propositions of the four so-called categorical forms, he painstakingly worked out exactly what those immediately evident deductive steps are and how they are chained to complete deductions. In his specialized prototype theory, Aristotle explained how to deduce from a given categorical premise set, no matter how large, any categorical conclusion implied by the given set. He did not extend this treatment to non-categorical deductions, thus setting a program for future logicians. The prototype, categorical syllogistic, was seen by Boole as a “first approximation” to a comprehensive logic. Today, however it appears more as the first of the dozens of logics already created and as the first exemplification of a family that continues to expand.     

Axiomatizing first order consequences in inclusion logic

Inclusion logic is a variant of dependence logic that was shown to have the same expressive power as positive greatest fixed-point logic. Inclusion logic is not axiomatisable in full, but its first order consequences can be axiomatized. In this paper, we provide such an explicit partial axiomatization by introducing a system of natural deduction for inclusion logic that is sound and complete for first order consequences in inclusion logic.     

Negation and partial axiomatizations of dependence and independence logic revisited

In this paper, we axiomatize the negatable consequences in dependence and independence logic by extending the systems of natural deduction of the logics given in [22] and [11]. We prove a characterization theorem for negatable formulas in independence logic and negatable sentences in dependence logic, and identify an interesting class of formulas that are negatable in independence logic. Dependence and independence atoms, first-order formulas belong to this class. We also demonstrate our extended system of independence logic by giving explicit derivations for Armstrong's Axioms and the Geiger-Paz-Pearl axioms of dependence and independence atoms.     

Translations from natural deduction to sequent calculus

Gentzen's “Untersuchungen” [1] gave a translation from natural deduction to sequent calculus with the property that normal derivations may translate into derivations with cuts. Prawitz in [8] gave a translation that instead produced cut‐free derivations. It is shown that by writing all elimination rules in the manner of disjunction elimination, with an arbitrary consequence, an isomorphic translation between normal derivations and cut‐free derivations is achieved. The standard elimination rules do not permit a full normal form, which explains the cuts in Gentzen's translation. Likewise, it is shown that Prawitz' translation contains an implicit process of cut elimination.     

How to assign ordinal numbers to combinatory terms with polymorphic types

The article investigates a system of polymorphically typed combinatory logic which is equivalent to G?del’s T. A notion of (strong) reduction is defined over terms of this system and it is proved that the class of well-formed terms is closed under both bracket abstraction and reduction. The main new result is that the number of contractions needed to reduce a term to normal form is computed by an ε ₀-recursive function. The ordinal assignments used to obtain this result are also used to prove that the system under consideration is indeed equivalent to G?del’s T. It is hoped that the methods used here can be extended so as to obtain similar results for stronger systems of polymorphically typed combinatory terms. An interesting corollary of such results is that they yield ordinally informative proofs of normalizability for sub-systems of second-order intuitionist logic, in natural deduction style.     

Natural deduction system for three-valued Heyting’s logic

A Gentzen-style natural deduction system for the propositional fragment of three-valued Heyting’s logic is presented.     

A Proof-Theoretic Semantics for Exclusion

The paper provides a proof-theory (natural deduction and sequent calculus) for a negative presentation of classical logic based on a single primitive of exclusion (of variable arity), generalizing the known presentation via the binary ‘nand. The completeness is established via deductive equivalence to Gentzens NK/LK systems.     

Cohomology of the Grothendieck construction

We consider cohomology of small categories with coefficients in a natural system in the sense of Baues and Wirsching. For any functor L : K → CAT, we construct a spectral sequence abutting to the cohomology of the Grothendieck construction of L in terms of the cohomology of K and of L(k), for k ∈ ObK.The first author was supported by DFG at University of BielefeldThe second author is a researcher from CONICET, Argentina     

Extracting BB′IW Inhabitants of Simple Types From Proofs in the Sequent Calculus {LT_\to^{t}} for Implicational Ticket Entailment

The decidability of the logic of pure ticket entailment means that the problem of inhabitation of simple types by combinators over the base { B, B′, I, W } is decidable too. Type-assignment systems are often formulated as natural deduction systems. However, our decision procedure for this logic, which we presented in earlier papers, relies on two sequent calculi and it does not yield directly a combinator for a theorem of ${T_\to}$ . Here we describe an algorithm to extract an inhabitant from a sequent calculus proof—without translating the proof into another proof system.     

Sémantique de type Kripke d'un système logique basé sur un ensemble ordonné fini

In order to modelize the reasoning of intelligent agents represented by a poset T, H. Rasiowa introduced logic systems called “Approximation Logics”. In these systems the use of a set of constants constitutes a fundamental tool. We have introduced in [8] a logic system called without this kind of constants but limited to the case that T is a finite poset. We have proved a completeness result for this system w.r.t. an algebraic semantics. We introduce in this paper a Kripke‐style semantics for a subsystem of for which there existes a deduction theorem. The set of “possible worldsr is enriched by a family of functions indexed by the elements of T and satisfying some conditions. We prove a completeness result for system with respect to this Kripke semantics and define a finite Kripke structure that characterizes the propositional fragment of logic . We introduce a reational semantics (found by E. Orlowska) which has the advantage to allow an interpretation of the propositionnal logic using only binary relations. We treat also the computational complexity of the satisfiability problem of the propositional fragment of logic .     

A Connection Between Cut Elimination and Normalization

A new set of conversions for derivations in the system of sequents for intuitionistic predicate logic will be defined. These conversions will be some modifications of Zucker's conversions from the system of sequents from [11], which will have the following characteristics: (1) these conversions will be sufficient for transforming a derivation into a cut-free one, and (2) in the natural deduction the image of each of these conversions will be either in the set of conversions for normalization procedure, or an identity of derivations. This will be used to give a new proof of the normalization theorem for natural deduction, as a consequence of the cut-elimination theorem for the system of sequents. Received: January 2003     

Models of linear logic

We engage a study of nonmodal linear logic which takes times ⊗ and the linear conditional ⊸ to be the basic connectives instead of times and linear negation ()^⊥ as in Girard's approach. This difference enables us to obtain a very large subsystem of linear logic (called positive linear logic) without an involutionary negation (if the law of double negation is removed from linear logic in Girard's formulation, the resulting subsystem is extremely limited). Our approach enables us to obtain several natural models for various subsystems of linear logic, including a generic model for the so-called minimal linear logic. In particular, it is seen that these models arise spontaneously in the transition from set theory to multiset theory. We also construct a model of full (nonmodal) linear logic that is generic relative to any model of positive linear logic. However, the problem of constructing a generic model for positive linear logic remains open. Bibliography: 2 titles. Published inZapiski Nauchnykh Seminarov POMI, Vol. 220, 1995, pp. 23–35. Original     

Sémantique algébrique ďun système logique basé sur un ensemble ordonné fini

In order to modelize the reasoning of an intelligent agent represented by a poset T, H. Rasiowa introduced logic systems called “Approximation Logics”. In these systems a set of constants constitutes a fundamental tool. In this papers, we consider logic systems called L′_T without this kind of constants but limited to the case where T is a finite poset. We prove a weak deduction theorem. We introduce also an algebraic semantics using Hey ting algebra with operators. To prove the completeness theorem of the L′_T system with respect to the algebraic semantics, we use the method of H. Rasiowa and R. Sikorski for first order logic. In the propositional case, a corollary allows us to assert that it is decidable to know “if a propositional formula is valid”. We study also certain relations between the L′_T logic and the intuitionistic and classical logics.     

Bilattices for deductions in multi-valued logic

In this exploratory paper we propose a framework for the deduction apparatus of multi-valued logics based on the idea that a deduction apparatus has to be a tool to manage information on truth values and not directly truth values of the formulas. This is obtained by embedding the algebraic structure V defined by the set of truth values into a bilattice B. The intended interpretation is that the elements of B are pieces of information on the elements of V. The resulting formalisms are particularized in the framework of fuzzy logic programming. Since we see fuzzy control as a chapter of multi-valued logic programming, this suggests a new and powerful approach to fuzzy control based on positive and negative conditions.     

The maximum principles for partially observed risk-sensitive optimal controls of Markov regime-switching jump-diffusion system

ABSTRACT

This paper studies partially observed risk-sensitive optimal control problems with correlated noises between the system and the observation. It is assumed that the state process is governed by a continuous-time Markov regime-switching jump-diffusion process and the cost functional is of an exponential-of-integral type. By virtue of a classical spike variational approach, we obtain two general maximum principles for the aforementioned problems. Moreover, under certain convexity assumptions on both the control domain and the Hamiltonian, we give a sufficient condition for the optimality. For illustration, a linear-quadratic risk-sensitive control problem is proposed and solved using the main results. As a natural deduction, a fully observed risk-sensitive maximum principle is also obtained and applied to study a risk-sensitive portfolio optimization problem. Closed-form expressions for both the optimal portfolio and the corresponding optimal cost functional are obtained.     

Recovering a Logic from Its Fragments by Meta-Fibring

In this paper we address the question of recovering a logic system by combining two or more fragments of it. We show that, in general, by fibring two or more fragments of a given logic the resulting logic is weaker than the original one, because some meta-properties of the connectives are lost after the combination process. In order to overcome this problem, the categories Mcon and Seq of multiple-conclusion consequence relations and sequent calculi, respectively, are introduced. The main feature of these categories is the preservation, by morphisms, of meta-properties of the consequence relations, which allows, in several cases, to recover a logic by fibring of its fragments. The fibring in this categories is called meta−fibring. Several examples of well-known logics which can be recovered by meta-fibring its fragments (in opposition to fibring in the usual categories) are given. Finally, a general semantics for objects in Seq (and, in particular, for objects in Mcon) is proposed, obtaining a category of logic systems called Log. A general theorem of preservation of completeness by fibring in Log is also obtained.     

The Maximality of Cartesian Categories

It is proved that equations between arrows assumed for cartesian categories are maximal in the sense that extending them with any new equation in the language of free cartesian categories collapses a cartesian category into a preorder. An analogous result holds for categories with binary products, which may lack a terminal object. The proof is based on a coherence result for cartesian categories, which is related to model‐theoretic methods of normalization. This maximality of cartesian categories, which is analogous to Post completeness, shows that the usual equivalence between deductions in conjunctive logic induced by βη normalization in natural deduction is chosen optimally.