Proof-theoretic Semantics for Intuitionistic Multiplicative Linear Logic

This work is the first exploration of proof-theoretic semantics for a substructural logic. It focuses on the base-extension semantics (B-eS) for intuitionistic multiplicative linear logic (IMLL). The starting point is a review of Sandqvist’s B-eS for intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL), for which we propose an alternative treatment of conjunction that takes the form of the generalized elimination rule for the connective. The resulting semantics is shown to be sound and complete. This motivates our main contribution, a B-eS for IMLL , in which the definitions of the logical constants all take the form of their elimination rule and for which soundness and completeness are established

Higher-order Linear Logic Programming of Categorial Deduction

We show how categorial deduction can be implemented in higher-order (linear) logic programming, thereby realising parsing as deduction for the associative and non-associative Lambek calculi. This provides a method of solution to the parsing problem of Lambek categorial grammar applicable to a variety of its extensions.Comment: 8 pages LaTeX, uses eaclap.sty, to appear EACL9

Tractable depth-bounded approximations to some propositional logics. Towards more realistic models of logical agents.

The depth-bounded approach seeks to provide realistic models of reasoners. Recognizing that most useful logics are idealizations in that they are either undecidable or likely to be intractable, the approach accounts for how they can be approximated in practice by resource-bounded agents. The approach has been applied to Classical Propositional Logic (CPL), yielding a hierarchy of tractable depth-bounded approximations to that logic, which in turn has been based on a KE/KI system. This Thesis shows that the approach can be naturally extended to useful nonclassical logics such as First-Degree Entailment (FDE), the Logic of Paradox (LP), Strong Kleene Logic (K3 ) and Intuitionistic Propositional Logic (IPL). To do this, we introduce a KE/KI-style system for each of those logics such that: is formulated via signed formulae, consist of linear operational rules and branching structural rule(s), can be used as a direct-proof and a refutation method, and is interesting independently of the approach in that it has an exponential speed-up on its tableau system counterpart. The latter given that we introduce a new class of examples which we prove to be hard for all tableau systems sharing the V/& rules with the classical one, but easy for their analogous KE-style systems. Then we focus on showing that each of our KE/KI-style systems naturally yields a hierarchy of tractable depth-bounded approximations to the respective logic, in terms of the maximum number of allowed nested applications of the branching rule(s). The rule(s) express(es) a generalized rule of bivalence, is (are) essentially cut rule(s) and govern(s) the manipulation of virtual information, which is information that an agent does not hold but she temporarily assumes as if she held it. Intuitively, the more virtual information needs to be invoked via the branching rule(s), the harder the inference is for the agent. So, the nested application the branching rule(s) provides a sensible measure of inferential depth. We also show that each hierarchy approximating FDE, LP, and K3 , admits of a 5-valued non-deterministic semantics; whereas, paving the way for a semantical characterization of the hierarchy approximating IPL, we provide a 3-valued non-deterministic semantics for the full logic that fixes the meaning of the connectives without appealing to “structural” conditions. Moreover, we show a super-polynomial lower bound for the strongest possible version of clausal tableaux on the well-known class of “truly fat” expressions (which are easy for KE), settling a problem left open in the literature. Further, we investigate a hierarchy of tractable depth-bounded approximations to CPL based only on KE. Finally, we propose a refinement of the p-simulation relation which is adequate to establish positive results about the superiority of a system over another with respect to proof-search

Automated Synthesis of Tableau Calculi

This paper presents a method for synthesising sound and complete tableau calculi. Given a specification of the formal semantics of a logic, the method generates a set of tableau inference rules that can then be used to reason within the logic. The method guarantees that the generated rules form a calculus which is sound and constructively complete. If the logic can be shown to admit finite filtration with respect to a well-defined first-order semantics then adding a general blocking mechanism provides a terminating tableau calculus. The process of generating tableau rules can be completely automated and produces, together with the blocking mechanism, an automated procedure for generating tableau decision procedures. For illustration we show the workability of the approach for a description logic with transitive roles and propositional intuitionistic logic.Comment: 32 page

A framework for semiring-annotated type systems

The use of proof assistants as a tool for programming language theorists is becoming ever more practical and widespread. There is a range of satisfactory implementations of simply typed calculi in proof assistants based on dependent type theory. In this thesis, I extend an account of Simply Typed λ-calculus so as to be able to represent and reason about calculi whose variables have restricted usage patterns. Examples of such calculi include a logic with an S4 □-modality, in which certain variables cannot be used “inside” a box (□); and Linear Logic, in which linear variables have to be used exactly once. While there are existing implementations of some of these calculi in proof assistants, many of these implementations share little with the best presentations of simply typed calculi without variable usage restrictions, and thus end up being poorly understood or suboptimal in facilitating mechanised reasoning. Concretely, the main result of this thesis is a framework for representing and reasoning about a wide range of calculi with restricted variable usage. All of these calculi support novel simultaneous renaming and substitution operations. Furthermore, I provide several other examples of generic and specific programs facilitated by the framework. All of this work is implemented in the proof assistant Agda.The use of proof assistants as a tool for programming language theorists is becoming ever more practical and widespread. There is a range of satisfactory implementations of simply typed calculi in proof assistants based on dependent type theory. In this thesis, I extend an account of Simply Typed λ-calculus so as to be able to represent and reason about calculi whose variables have restricted usage patterns. Examples of such calculi include a logic with an S4 □-modality, in which certain variables cannot be used “inside” a box (□); and Linear Logic, in which linear variables have to be used exactly once. While there are existing implementations of some of these calculi in proof assistants, many of these implementations share little with the best presentations of simply typed calculi without variable usage restrictions, and thus end up being poorly understood or suboptimal in facilitating mechanised reasoning. Concretely, the main result of this thesis is a framework for representing and reasoning about a wide range of calculi with restricted variable usage. All of these calculi support novel simultaneous renaming and substitution operations. Furthermore, I provide several other examples of generic and specific programs facilitated by the framework. All of this work is implemented in the proof assistant Agda