8,300 research outputs found
Comparing and evaluating extended Lambek calculi
Lambeks Syntactic Calculus, commonly referred to as the Lambek calculus, was
innovative in many ways, notably as a precursor of linear logic. But it also
showed that we could treat our grammatical framework as a logic (as opposed to
a logical theory). However, though it was successful in giving at least a basic
treatment of many linguistic phenomena, it was also clear that a slightly more
expressive logical calculus was needed for many other cases. Therefore, many
extensions and variants of the Lambek calculus have been proposed, since the
eighties and up until the present day. As a result, there is now a large class
of calculi, each with its own empirical successes and theoretical results, but
also each with its own logical primitives. This raises the question: how do we
compare and evaluate these different logical formalisms? To answer this
question, I present two unifying frameworks for these extended Lambek calculi.
Both are proof net calculi with graph contraction criteria. The first calculus
is a very general system: you specify the structure of your sequents and it
gives you the connectives and contractions which correspond to it. The calculus
can be extended with structural rules, which translate directly into graph
rewrite rules. The second calculus is first-order (multiplicative
intuitionistic) linear logic, which turns out to have several other,
independently proposed extensions of the Lambek calculus as fragments. I will
illustrate the use of each calculus in building bridges between analyses
proposed in different frameworks, in highlighting differences and in helping to
identify problems.Comment: Empirical advances in categorial grammars, Aug 2015, Barcelona,
Spain. 201
Changing a semantics: opportunism or courage?
The generalized models for higher-order logics introduced by Leon Henkin, and
their multiple offspring over the years, have become a standard tool in many
areas of logic. Even so, discussion has persisted about their technical status,
and perhaps even their conceptual legitimacy. This paper gives a systematic
view of generalized model techniques, discusses what they mean in mathematical
and philosophical terms, and presents a few technical themes and results about
their role in algebraic representation, calibrating provability, lowering
complexity, understanding fixed-point logics, and achieving set-theoretic
absoluteness. We also show how thinking about Henkin's approach to semantics of
logical systems in this generality can yield new results, dispelling the
impression of adhocness. This paper is dedicated to Leon Henkin, a deep
logician who has changed the way we all work, while also being an always open,
modest, and encouraging colleague and friend.Comment: 27 pages. To appear in: The life and work of Leon Henkin: Essays on
his contributions (Studies in Universal Logic) eds: Manzano, M., Sain, I. and
Alonso, E., 201
A Complete Axiomatization of Quantified Differential Dynamic Logic for Distributed Hybrid Systems
We address a fundamental mismatch between the combinations of dynamics that
occur in cyber-physical systems and the limited kinds of dynamics supported in
analysis. Modern applications combine communication, computation, and control.
They may even form dynamic distributed networks, where neither structure nor
dimension stay the same while the system follows hybrid dynamics, i.e., mixed
discrete and continuous dynamics. We provide the logical foundations for
closing this analytic gap. We develop a formal model for distributed hybrid
systems. It combines quantified differential equations with quantified
assignments and dynamic dimensionality-changes. We introduce a dynamic logic
for verifying distributed hybrid systems and present a proof calculus for this
logic. This is the first formal verification approach for distributed hybrid
systems. We prove that our calculus is a sound and complete axiomatization of
the behavior of distributed hybrid systems relative to quantified differential
equations. In our calculus we have proven collision freedom in distributed car
control even when an unbounded number of new cars may appear dynamically on the
road
Strategy Logic with Imperfect Information
We introduce an extension of Strategy Logic for the imperfect-information
setting, called SLii, and study its model-checking problem. As this logic
naturally captures multi-player games with imperfect information, the problem
turns out to be undecidable. We introduce a syntactical class of "hierarchical
instances" for which, intuitively, as one goes down the syntactic tree of the
formula, strategy quantifications are concerned with finer observations of the
model. We prove that model-checking SLii restricted to hierarchical instances
is decidable. This result, because it allows for complex patterns of
existential and universal quantification on strategies, greatly generalises
previous ones, such as decidability of multi-player games with imperfect
information and hierarchical observations, and decidability of distributed
synthesis for hierarchical systems. To establish the decidability result, we
introduce and study QCTL*ii, an extension of QCTL* (itself an extension of CTL*
with second-order quantification over atomic propositions) by parameterising
its quantifiers with observations. The simple syntax of QCTL* ii allows us to
provide a conceptually neat reduction of SLii to QCTL*ii that separates
concerns, allowing one to forget about strategies and players and focus solely
on second-order quantification. While the model-checking problem of QCTL*ii is,
in general, undecidable, we identify a syntactic fragment of hierarchical
formulas and prove, using an automata-theoretic approach, that it is decidable.
The decidability result for SLii follows since the reduction maps hierarchical
instances of SLii to hierarchical formulas of QCTL*ii
Quantified CTL: Expressiveness and Complexity
While it was defined long ago, the extension of CTL with quantification over
atomic propositions has never been studied extensively. Considering two
different semantics (depending whether propositional quantification refers to
the Kripke structure or to its unwinding tree), we study its expressiveness
(showing in particular that QCTL coincides with Monadic Second-Order Logic for
both semantics) and characterise the complexity of its model-checking and
satisfiability problems, depending on the number of nested propositional
quantifiers (showing that the structure semantics populates the polynomial
hierarchy while the tree semantics populates the exponential hierarchy)
The Grail theorem prover: Type theory for syntax and semantics
As the name suggests, type-logical grammars are a grammar formalism based on
logic and type theory. From the prespective of grammar design, type-logical
grammars develop the syntactic and semantic aspects of linguistic phenomena
hand-in-hand, letting the desired semantics of an expression inform the
syntactic type and vice versa. Prototypical examples of the successful
application of type-logical grammars to the syntax-semantics interface include
coordination, quantifier scope and extraction.This chapter describes the Grail
theorem prover, a series of tools for designing and testing grammars in various
modern type-logical grammars which functions as a tool . All tools described in
this chapter are freely available
- …