21 research outputs found
Propositional Logics Complexity and the Sub-Formula Property
In 1979 Richard Statman proved, using proof-theory, that the purely
implicational fragment of Intuitionistic Logic (M-imply) is PSPACE-complete. He
showed a polynomially bounded translation from full Intuitionistic
Propositional Logic into its implicational fragment. By the PSPACE-completeness
of S4, proved by Ladner, and the Goedel translation from S4 into Intuitionistic
Logic, the PSPACE- completeness of M-imply is drawn. The sub-formula principle
for a deductive system for a logic L states that whenever F1,...,Fk proves A,
there is a proof in which each formula occurrence is either a sub-formula of A
or of some of Fi. In this work we extend Statman result and show that any
propositional (possibly modal) structural logic satisfying a particular
formulation of the sub-formula principle is in PSPACE. If the logic includes
the minimal purely implicational logic then it is PSPACE-complete. As a
consequence, EXPTIME-complete propositional logics, such as PDL and the
common-knowledge epistemic logic with at least 2 agents satisfy this particular
sub-formula principle, if and only if, PSPACE=EXPTIME. We also show how our
technique can be used to prove that any finitely many-valued logic has the set
of its tautologies in PSPACE.Comment: In Proceedings DCM 2014, arXiv:1504.0192
Bilateral Inversion Principles
This paper formulates a bilateral account of harmony that is an alternative to one proposed by Francez. It builds on an account of harmony for unilateral logic proposed by Kürbis and the observation that reading the rules for the connectives of bilateral logic bottom up gives the grounds and consequences of formulas with the opposite speech act. I formulate a process I call 'inversion' which allows the determination of assertive elimination rules from assertive introduction rules, and rejective elimination rules from rejective introduction rules, and conversely. It corresponds to Francez's notion of vertical harmony. I also formulate a process I call 'conversion', which allows the determination of rejective introduction rules from assertive elimination rules and conversely, and the determination of assertive introduction rules from rejective elimination rules and conversely. It corresponds to Francez's notion of horizontal harmony. The account has a number of features that distinguishes it from Francez's
A Quick Overview on the Quantum Control Approach to the Lambda Calculus
In this short overview, we start with the basics of quantum computing,
explaining the difference between the quantum and the classical control
paradigms. We give an overview of the quantum control line of research within
the lambda calculus, ranging from untyped calculi up to categorical and
realisability models. This is a summary of the last 10+ years of research in
this area, starting from Arrighi and Dowek's seminal work until today.Comment: In Proceedings LSFA 2021, arXiv:2204.0341
Knot much like tonk
Connectives such as Tonk have posed a significant challenge to the inferentialist. It has been recently argued (Button 2016; Button and Walsh 2018) that the classical semanticist faces an analogous problem due to the definability of "nasty connectives" under non-standard interpretations of the classical propositional vocabulary. In this paper, we defend the classical semanticist from this alleged problem
General-elimination stability
General-elimination harmony articulates Gentzen's idea that the elimination-rules are justified if they infer from an assertion no more than can already be inferred from the grounds for making it. Dummett described the rules as not only harmonious but stable if the E-rules allow one to infer no more and no less than the I-rules justify. Pfenning and Davies call the rules locally complete if the E-rules are strong enough to allow one to infer the original judgement. A method is given of generating harmonious general-elimination rules from a collection of I-rules. We show that the general-elimination rules satisfy Pfenning and Davies' test for local completeness, but question whether that is enough to show that they are stable. Alternative conditions for stability are considered, including equivalence between the introduction- and elimination-meanings of a connective, and recovery of the grounds for assertion, finally generalizing the notion of local completeness to capture Dummett's notion of stability satisfactorily. We show that the general-elimination rules meet the last of these conditions, and so are indeed not only harmonious but also stable.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe
Against Harmony
Many prominent writers on the philosophy of logic, including Michael Dummett, Dag Prawitz, Neil Tennant, have held that the introduction and elimination rules of a logical connective must be ‘in harmony ’ if the connective is to possess a sense. This Harmony Thesis has been used to justify the choice of logic: in particular, supposed violations of it by the classical rules for negation have been the basis for arguments for switching from classical to intuitionistic logic. The Thesis has also had an influence on the philosophy of language: some prominent writers in that area, notably Dummett and Robert Brandom, have taken it to be a special case of a more general requirement that the grounds for asserting a statement must cohere with its consequences. This essay considers various ways of making the Harmony Thesis precise and scrutinizes the most influential arguments for it. The verdict is negative: all the extant arguments for the Thesis are weak, and no version of it is remotely plausible