Linear logic operators in transparent intensional logic

This article shows how individual Petri nets form models of Girard's intuitionistic linear logic. It explores questions of expressiveness and completeness of linear logic with respect to this interpretation. An aim is to use Petri nets to give an understanding of linear logic and give some appraisal of the value of linear logic as a specification logic for Petri nets. This article might serve as a tutorial, providing one in-road into Girard's linear logic via Petri nets. With this in mind we have added several exercises and their solutions. We have made no attempt to be exhaustive in our treatment, dedicating our treatment to one semantics of intuitionistic linear logic.Completeness is shown for several versions of Girard's linear logic with respect to Petri nets as the class of models. The strongest logic considered is intuitionistic linear logic, with ⊗, ⊸, &, ⊕ and the exponential ! (“of course”), and forms of quantification. This logic is shown sound and complete with respect to atomic nets (these include nets in which every transition leads to a nonempty multiset of places). The logic is remarkably expressive, enabling descriptions of the kinds of properties one might wish to show of nets; in particular, negative properties, asserting the impossibility of an assertion, can also be expressed. A start is made on decidability issues.

Girard's linear logic [Gir87] is an extension of propositional logic with new connectives providing a logical treatment of resource control. As a first hint, consider the linear λ-terms, which are the λ-terms defined with the following restriction: when an abstraction λ x.M is formed, then x occurs exactly once in M . Linear λ-terms are normalized in linear time, that is, the number of reduction steps to their normal form is proportional to their size: a linear β-redex (λ x.M ) N involves no duplication of the argument N . Thus all the complexity of normalization comes from non-linearity. Linear logic pushes the limits of constructivity much beyond intuitionistic logic. A proper proof theoretical introduction to linear logic is beyond the scope of this book. In this chapter, we content ourselves with a semantic introduction. By doing so, we actually follow the historical thread: the connectives of linear logic arose from the consideration of (a particularly simple version of) the stable model. In section 13.1, we examine stable functions between coherence spaces, and discover two decompositions. First the function space E → E ′ is isomorphic to a space (! E )⊸ E ′, where ⊸ constructs the space of linear functions, and where! is a constructor which allows reuse of data. Intuitively, linear functions, like linear terms, can use their input only once. On the other hand, the explicit declaration of reusability,!, allows us to recover all functions and terms.

We introduce a new theory of concepts conceived as structured abstract entities. The theory is based on the key notion of Transparent Intensional Logic (TIL), known as TIL construction. The rich procedural semantics of TIL makes it possible to explicitly analyze all the semantically salient features of natural language expressions. We illustrate how to make use of TIL theory of concepts in distinguishing analytical and empirical concepts, and particular kinds of necessities. We also deal with a rigorous specification of requisite relations between intensions such as properties. Finally, ontology is characterised as a relatively stable part of the system that should play an integrating role. We show how to make use of TIL rich theory in specification of the content of ontologies in a multi-agent system.

Recent development of logic programming languages based on linear logic suggests a successful direction to extend logic programming to be more expressive and more efficient. The treatment of formulasas-resources gives us not only powerful expressiveness, but also efficient access to a large set of data. However, in linear logic, whole resources are kept in one context, and there is no straight way to represent complex data structures as resources. For example, in order to represent an ordered list and time-dependent data, we need to put additional indices for each resource formula. This paper describes a logic programming language, called TLLP, based on intuitionistic temporal linear logic. This logic, an extension of linear logic with some features from temporal logics, allows the use of the modal operators '?'(next-time) and '?'(always) in addition to the operators used in intuitionistic linear logic. The intuitive meaning of modal operators is as follows: ? B means that B can be used exactly once at the next moment in time; ? B means that B can be used exactly once any time; !B means that B can be used arbitrarily many times (including 0 times) at any time. We first give a proof theoretic formulation of the logic of the TLLP language. We then present a series of resource management systems designed to implement not only interpreters but also compilers based on an extension of the standard WAM model.

In 1958 J. Lambek introduced a calculusL of syntactic types and defined an equivalence relation on types: “x≡ y means that there exists a sequence x=x1,...,xn=y (n ≥ 1), such thatx i →x i+1 or xi+ →x i (1 ≤i ≤ n)”. He pointed out thatx ≡y if and only if there is joinz such thatx →z andy →z. This paper gives an effective characterization of this equivalence for the Lambeck calculiL andLP, and for the multiplicative fragments of Girard's and Yetter's linear logics. Moreover, for the non-directed Lambek calculusLP and the multiplicative fragment of Girard's linear logic, we present linear time algorithms deciding whether two types are equal, and finding a join for them if they are.

This paper describes the design of a knowledge representation and reasoning system, named Dolphin, which is based on higher-order temporal Transparent Intensional Logic (TIL). An intelligent agent (NAM), that is able to read newspaper headlines from specialized internet server and allows users to ask questions about various world situations is chosen to demonstrate Dolphin features. Temporal aspects play an essential role in natural language therefore we present how this phenomenon is handled in the system. Reasoning capabilities of the agent are divided into three individual strategies and described in the text. As a result we compare NAM answers to one of the most used search engines nowadays.

In this paper we continue our study of Girard's Linear Logic and introduce a new Linear Logic with modalities. Our logic describes not only consumption, but presence of resources as well. It describes transformation of resources not only for the single point but for some net, where supplies can be sent from one object to another one using interfaces. We introduce a new semantics and a new calculus for this logic and prove the completeness theorem for this calculus in respect to our semantics.

Generating plans in linear logic: I. actions as proofs

1.1 Relationship between Petri net and linear logic Petri nets were first introduced by Petri in his seminal Ph.D. thesis, and both the theory and the applications of his model have flourished in concurrency theory (Reisig & Rozenberg, 1998a; Reisig & Rozenberg, 1998b). The relationships between Petri nets and linear logics have been studied by many researchers (Engberg & Winskel, 1997; Farwer, 1999; Hirai, 2000; Hirai 1999; Ishihara & Hiraish, 2001; Kamide, 2004, Kamide, 2006; Kanovich, 1995; Kanovich 1994; LarcheyWendling & Galmiche, 1998; Larchey-Wendling & Galmiche, 2000; Lilius, 1992; Mart -Oliet & Meseguer, 1991; Okada, 1998; Tanabe, 1997). A category theoretical investigation of such a relationship was given by Mart -Oliet and Meseguer (Mart -Oliet & Meseguer, 1991), purely syntactical approach using Horn linear logic was established by Kanovich (Kanovich, 1995; Kanovich 1994), a naive phase linear logic for a certain class of Petri nets was given by Okada (Okada, 1998), a linear logical view of object Petri nets were studied by Farwer (Farwer, 1999), and various Petri net interpretations of linear logic using quantale models were obtained by Ishihara and Hiraishi (Ishihara & Hiraish, 2001), Engberg and Winskel (Engberg & Winskel, 1997), Larchey-Wendling and Galmiche (Larchey-Wendling & Galmiche, 1998; Larchey-Wendling & Galmiche, 2000), and Lilius (Lilius, 1992). Petri net interpretations using Kripke semantics for various fragments and extensions of intuitionistic linear logic were studied by Kamide (Kamide, 2004; Kamide, 2006c). In (Kamide, 2004), Petri net interpretations of various fragments of a spatio-temporal soft linear logic were discussed. In (Kamide, 2006c), Petri nets with inhibitor arcs, which were first introduced by Kosaraju (Kosaraju, 1973) to show the limitation of the usual Petri nets, were described using Kripke semantics for intuitionistic linear logic with strong negation. The approarches using Kripke semantics can obtain a very simple correspondence between Petri net and linear logic.

This handbook provides a systematic survey of the central areas of philosophical logic. It is divided into four volumes, each devoted to a major sub-field within the disciplines. The articles should be of value to general philosophers, linguists, logicians, mathematicians and computer scientists. Volume 1, Elements of Classical Logic, deals with the background to what has come to be considered the standard formulation of predicate logic - both as far as its semantics and proof theory are concerned. The central chapter on predicate logic is followed by chapters outlining various alternative, but essentially equivalent ways of constructing the semantics for first-order logic as well as its proof theory. In addition, this volume contains a discussion of higher-order extensions of first-order logic and a compendium of the algorithmic and decision-theoretic prerequisites in the study of logical systems. Volume 2, Extensions of Classical Logic, surveys the most significant extensions of predicate logic and their applications to various philosophical fields of inquiry. The 12 chapters in this volume together provide a succinct introduction to a variety of intensional frameworks, a discussion of the most well-known logical systems, as well as an overview of major applications and of the open problems in the respective fields. Volume 3, Alternatives to Classical Logic, consists of a series of surveys of some of the alternatives to the basic assumptions of classical logic. These include many-valued logic, partial logic, free logic, relevance and entailment logics, dialogue logic, quantum logic and intuitionism. Volume 4, Topics in the Philosophy of Language, presents a panorama of the applications of logical tools and methods in the formal analysis of natural language. Since a number of developments in philosophical logic were originally stimulated by concern arising in the semantic analysis of natural language discourse, the chapters in this volume provide some criteria of evaluation of the applications of work in philosophical logic. In revealing both the adequacies and inadequacies of logical investigations in the semantic structures of natural discourse, these chapters also point the way to future developments in philosophical logic in general and thus close again the circle of inquiry relating logic and language.

Modalities for model checking: branching time logic strikes back

This paper presents a formulation and completeness proof of the resolution-type calculi for the first order fragment of Girard's linear logic by a general method which provides the general scheme of transforming a cutfree Gentzen-type system into a resolution type system, preserving the structure of derivations. This is a direct extension of the method introduced by Maslov for classical predicate logic. Ideas of the author and Zamov are used to avoid skolomization. Completeness of strategies is first established for the Gentzen-type system, and then transferred to resolution. The propositional resolution system was implemented by T. Tammet.

We introduce structural rules mingle, and investigate theorem-equivalence, cut- eliminability, decidability, interpolability and variable sharing property for sequent calculi having the mingle. These results include new cut-elimination results for the extended logics: FLm (full Lambek logic with the mingle), GLm (Girard's linear logic with the mingle) and Lm (Lambek calculus with restricted mingle).

A linear process is a system of events and states related by an inner product, on which are defined the behaviorally motivated operations of tensor product or orthocurrence, sum or concurrence, sequence, and choice. Linear process algebra or LPA is the theory of this framework. LPA resembles Girard's linear logic with the differences attributable to its focus on behavior instead of proof. As with MLL the multiplicative part can be construed via the Curry-Howard isomorphism as an enrichment of Boolean algebra. The additives cater for independent concurrency or parallel play. The traditional sequential operations of sequence and choice exploit process-specific state information catering for notions of transition and cancellation.

Several type systems have been proposed to statically control the time complexity of lambda-calculus programs and characterize complexity classes such as FPTIME or FEXPTIME. A first line of research stems from linear logic and restricted versions of its !-modality controlling duplication. An instance of this is light linear logic for polynomial time computation [5]. A second approach relies on the idea of tracking the size increase between input and output, and together with a restricted recursion scheme, to deduce time complexity bounds. This second approach is illustrated for instance by non-size-increasing types [8]. However, both approaches suffer from limitations. The first one, that of linear logic, has a limited intensional expressivity, that is to say some natural polynomial time programs are not typable. As to the second approach it is essentially linear, more precisely it does not allow for a non-linear use of functional arguments. In the present work we incorporate both approaches into a common type system, in order to overcome their respective constraints. The source language we consider is a lambda-calculus with data-types and iteration, that is to say a variant of Gödel's system T. Our goal is to design a system for this language allowing both to handle non-linear functional arguments and to keep a good intensional expressivity. We illustrate our methodology by choosing the system of elementary linear logic (ELL) and combining it with a system of linear size types. We discuss the expressivity of this new type system, called sEAL, and prove that it gives a characterization of the complexity classes FPTIME and 2k-FEXPTIME, for k≥0.