Canonical Proof nets for Classical Logic

Proof nets provide abstract counterparts to sequent proofs modulo rule permutations; the idea being that if two proofs have the same underlying proof-net, they are in essence the same proof. Providing a convincing proof-net counterpart to proofs in the classical sequent calculus is thus an important step in understanding classical sequent calculus proofs. By convincing, we mean that (a) there should be a canonical function from sequent proofs to proof nets, (b) it should be possible to check the correctness of a net in polynomial time, (c) every correct net should be obtainable from a sequent calculus proof, and (d) there should be a cut-elimination procedure which preserves correctness. Previous attempts to give proof-net-like objects for propositional classical logic have failed at least one of the above conditions. In [23], the author presented a calculus of proof nets (expansion nets) satisfying (a) and (b); the paper defined a sequent calculus corresponding to expansion nets but gave no explicit demonstration of (c). That sequent calculus, called LK\ast in this paper, is a novel one-sided sequent calculus with both additively and multiplicatively formulated disjunction rules. In this paper (a self-contained extended version of [23]), we give a full proof of (c) for expansion nets with respect to LK\ast, and in addition give a cut-elimination procedure internal to expansion nets - this makes expansion nets the first notion of proof-net for classical logic satisfying all four criteria.Comment: Accepted for publication in APAL (Special issue, Classical Logic and Computation

An Abstract Approach to Stratification in Linear Logic

We study the notion of stratification, as used in subsystems of linear logic with low complexity bounds on the cut-elimination procedure (the so-called light logics), from an abstract point of view, introducing a logical system in which stratification is handled by a separate modality. This modality, which is a generalization of the paragraph modality of Girard's light linear logic, arises from a general categorical construction applicable to all models of linear logic. We thus learn that stratification may be formulated independently of exponential modalities; when it is forced to be connected to exponential modalities, it yields interesting complexity properties. In particular, from our analysis stem three alternative reformulations of Baillot and Mazza's linear logic by levels: one geometric, one interactive, and one semantic

Proof nets and the call-by-value λ-calculus

International audienceThis paper gives a detailed account of the relationship between (a variant of) the call-by-value lambda calculus and linear logic proof nets. The presentation is carefully tuned in order to realize an isomorphism between the two systems: every single rewriting step on the calculus maps to a single step on proof nets, and viceversa. In this way, we obtain an algebraic reformulation of proof nets. Moreover, we provide a simple correctness criterion for our proof nets, which employ boxes in an unusual way, and identify a subcalculus that is shown to be as expressive as the full calculus

Two paradigms of logical computation in affine logic?

We propose a notion of symmetric reduction for a system of proof nets for multiplicative Affine Logic with Mix. We prove that such a reduction has the strong normalization and Church-Rosser properties. A notion of irrelevance in a proof net is defined and the possibility of cancelling the irrelevant parts without erasing the entire net is taken as one of the correctness conditions. Therefore purely local cut-reductions are given, minimizing cancellation and suggesting a paradigm of "computation without garbage collection". Reconsidering Ketonen and Weyhrauch's decision procedure for affine logic, the use od the mix rule is related to the non-determinism of classical proof theory. The question arises whether these features of classical cut-elimination are really irreducible to the familiar paradigm of cut-elimination in intuitionistic and linea logic

A Coding Theoretic Study on MLL proof nets

Coding theory is very useful for real world applications. A notable example is digital television. Basically, coding theory is to study a way of detecting and/or correcting data that may be true or false. Moreover coding theory is an area of mathematics, in which there is an interplay between many branches of mathematics, e.g., abstract algebra, combinatorics, discrete geometry, information theory, etc. In this paper we propose a novel approach for analyzing proof nets of Multiplicative Linear Logic (MLL) by coding theory. We define families of proof structures and introduce a metric space for each family. In each family, 1. an MLL proof net is a true code element; 2. a proof structure that is not an MLL proof net is a false (or corrupted) code element. The definition of our metrics reflects the duality of the multiplicative connectives elegantly. In this paper we show that in the framework one error-detecting is possible but one error-correcting not. Our proof of the impossibility of one error-correcting is interesting in the sense that a proof theoretical property is proved using a graph theoretical argument. In addition, we show that affine logic and MLL + MIX are not appropriate for this framework. That explains why MLL is better than such similar logics.Comment: minor modification

Linear Logic and Strong Normalization

Strong normalization for linear logic requires elaborated rewriting techniques. In this paper we give a new presentation of MELL proof nets, without any commutative cut-elimination rule. We show how this feature induces a compact and simple proof of strong normalization, via reducibility candidates. It is the first proof of strong normalization for MELL which does not rely on any form of confluence, and so it smoothly scales up to full linear logic. Moreover, it is an axiomatic proof, as more generally it holds for every set of rewriting rules satisfying three very natural requirements with respect to substitution, commutation with promotion, full composition, and Kesner\u27s IE property. The insight indeed comes from the theory of explicit substitutions, and from looking at the exponentials as a substitution device