Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userProof-graphs for Minimal Implicational Logic
104
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
EPTCS
Publication date
2014
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
It is well-known that the size of propositional classical proofs can be huge. Proof theoretical studies discovered exponential gaps between normal or cut free proofs and their respective non-normal proofs. The aim of this work is to study how to reduce the weight of propositional deductions. We present the formalism of proof-graphs for purely implicational logic, which are graphs of a specific shape that are intended to capture the logical structure of a deduction. The advantage of this formalism is that formulas can be shared in the reduced proof. In the present paper we give a precise definition of proof-graphs for the minimal implicational logic, together with a normalization procedure for these proof-graphs. In contrast to standard tree-like formalisms, our normalization does not increase the number of nodes, when applied to the corresponding minimal proof-graph representations.
rate research
Read More
The problem we want to solve is how to generate all theorems of a given size in the implicational fragment of propositional intuitionistic linear logic. We start by filtering for linearity the proof terms associated by our Prolog-based theorem prover for Implicational Intuitionistic Logic. This works, but using for each formula a PSPACE-complete algorithm limits it to very small formulas. We take a few walks back and forth over the bridge between proof terms and theorems, provided by the Curry-Howard isomorphism, and derive step-by-step an efficient algorithm requiring a low polynomial effort per generated theorem. The resulting Prolog program runs in O(N) space for terms of size N and generates in a few hours 7,566,084,686 theorems in the implicational fragment of Linear Intuitionistic Logic together with their proof terms in normal form. As applications, we generate datasets for correctness and scalability testing of linear logic theorem provers and training data for neural networks working on theorem proving challenges. The results in the paper, organized as a literate Prolog program, are fully replicable. Keywords: combinatorial generation of provable formulas of a given size, intuitionistic and linear logic theorem provers, theorems of the implicational fragment of propositional linear intuitionistic logic, Curry-Howard isomorphism, efficient generation of linear lambda terms in normal form, Prolog programs for lambda term generation and theorem proving.
Description Logics (DLs) are a family of languages used for the representation and reasoning on the knowledge of an application domain, in a structured and formal manner. In order to achieve this objective, several provers, such as RACER and FaCT++, have been implemented, but these provers themselves have not been yet certified. In order to ensure the soundness of derivations in these DLs, it is necessary to formally verify the deductions applied by these reasoners. Formal methods offer powerful tools for the specification and verification of proof procedures, among them there are methods for proving properties such as soundness, completeness and termination of a proof procedure. In this paper, we present the definition of a proof procedure for the Description Logic ALC, based on a semantic tableau method. We ensure validity of our prover by proving its soundness, completeness and termination properties using Isabelle proof assistant. The proof proceeds in two phases, first by establishing these properties on an abstract level, and then by instantiating them for an implementation based on lists.
In this paper we present a proof system that operates on graphs instead of formulas. Starting from the well-known relationship between formulas and cographs, we drop the cograph-conditions and look at arbitrary undirected) graphs. This means that we lose the tree structure of the formulas corresponding to the cographs, and we can no longer use standard proof theoretical methods that depend on that tree structure. In order to overcome this difficulty, we use a modular decomposition of graphs and some techniques from deep inference where inference rules do not rely on the main connective of a formula. For our proof system we show the admissibility of cut and a generalization of the splitting property. Finally, we show that our system is a conservative extension of multiplicative linear logic with mix, and we argue that our graphs form a notion of generalized connective.
We propose a model of the substructural logic of Bunched Implications (BI) that is suitable for reasoning about quantum states. In our model, the separating conjunction of BI describes separable quantum states. We develop a program logic where pre- and post-conditions are BI formulas describing quantum states -- the program logic can be seen as a counterpart of separation logic for imperative quantum programs. We exercise the logic for proving the security of quantum one-time pad and secret sharing, and we show how the program logic can be used to discover a flaw in Google Cirqs tutorial on the Variational Quantum Algorithm (VQA).
The importance of transformations and normal forms in logic programming, and generally in computer science, is well documented. This paper investigates transformations and normal forms in the context of Defeasible Logic, a simple but efficient formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning based on rules and priorities. The transformations described in this paper have two main benefits: on one hand they can be used as a theoretical tool that leads to a deeper understanding of the formalism, and on the other hand they have been used in the development of an efficient implementation of defeasible logic.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
