Do you want to publish a course? Click here

Deriving Theorems in Implicational Linear Logic, Declaratively

139   0   0.0 ( 0 )
 Added by EPTCS
 Publication date 2020
and research's language is English
 Authors Paul Tarau




Ask ChatGPT about the research

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.



rate research

Read More

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.
This volume contains a selection of papers presented at Linearity/TLLA 2018: Joint Linearity and TLLA workshops (part of FLOC 2018) held on July 7-8, 2018 in Oxford. Linearity has been a key feature in several lines of research in both theoretical and practical approaches to computer science. On the theoretical side there is much work stemming from linear logic dealing with proof technology, complexity classes and more recently quantum computation. On the practical side there is work on program analysis, expressive operational semantics for programming languages, linear programming languages, program transformation, update analysis and efficient implementation techniques. Linear logic is not only a theoretical tool to analyse the use of resources in logic and computation. It is also a corpus of tools, approaches, and methodologies (proof nets, exponential decomposition, geometry of interaction, coherent spaces, relational models, etc.) that were originally developed for the study of linear logics syntax and semantics and are nowadays applied in several other fields.
189 - Bart Bogaerts 2019
Since the first conference held in Marseille in 1982, ICLP has been the premier international event for presenting research in logic programming. Contributions are sought in all areas of logic programming, including but not restricted to: Foundations: Semantics, Formalisms, Nonmonotonic reasoning, Knowledge representation. Languages: Concurrency, Objects, Coordination, Mobility, Higher Order, Types, Modes, Assertions, Modules, Meta-programming, Logic-based domain-specific languages, Programming Techniques. Declarative programming: Declarative program development, Analysis, Type and mode inference, Partial evaluation, Abstract interpretation, Transformation, Validation, Verification, Debugging, Profiling, Testing, Execution visualization Implementation: Virtual machines, Compilation, Memory management, Parallel/distributed execution, Constraint handling rules, Tabling, Foreign interfaces, User interfaces. Related Paradigms and Synergies: Inductive and Co-inductive Logic Programming, Constraint Logic Programming, Answer Set Programming, Interaction with SAT, SMT and CSP solvers, Logic programming techniques for type inference and theorem proving, Argumentation, Probabilistic Logic Programming, Relations to object-oriented and Functional programming. Applications: Databases, Big Data, Data integration and federation, Software engineering, Natural language processing, Web and Semantic Web, Agents, Artificial intelligence, Computational life sciences, Education, Cybersecurity, and Robotics.
154 - Francesco Ricca 2020
Since the first conference held in Marseille in 1982, ICLP has been the premier international event for presenting research in logic programming. Contributions are solicited in all areas of logic programming and related areas, including but not restricted to: - Foundations: Semantics, Formalisms, Answer-Set Programming, Non-monotonic Reasoning, Knowledge Representation. - Declarative Programming: Inference engines, Analysis, Type and mode inference, Partial evaluation, Abstract interpretation, Transformation, Validation, Verification, Debugging, Profiling, Testing, Logic-based domain-specific languages, constraint handling rules. - Related Paradigms and Synergies: Inductive and Co-inductive Logic Programming, Constraint Logic Programming, Interaction with SAT, SMT and CSP solvers, Logic programming techniques for type inference and theorem proving, Argumentation, Probabilistic Logic Programming, Relations to object-oriented and Functional programming, Description logics, Neural-Symbolic Machine Learning, Hybrid Deep Learning and Symbolic Reasoning. - Implementation: Concurrency and distribution, Objects, Coordination, Mobility, Virtual machines, Compilation, Higher Order, Type systems, Modules, Constraint handling rules, Meta-programming, Foreign interfaces, User interfaces. - Applications: Databases, Big Data, Data Integration and Federation, Software Engineering, Natural Language Processing, Web and Semantic Web, Agents, Artificial Intelligence, Bioinformatics, Education, Computational life sciences, Education, Cybersecurity, and Robotics.
195 - Max Kanovich 2017
Linear Logic was introduced by Girard as a resource-sensitive refinement of classical logic. It turned out that full propositional Linear Logic is undecidable (Lincoln, Mitchell, Scedrov, and Shankar) and, hence, it is more expressive than (modalized) classical or intuitionistic logic. In this paper we focus on the study of the simplest fragments of Linear Logic, such as the one-literal and constant-only fragments (the latter contains no literals at all). Here we demonstrate that all these extremely simple fragments of Linear Logic (one-literal, $bot$-only, and even unit-only) are exactly of the same expressive power as the corresponding fu

suggested questions

comments
Fetching comments Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
mircosoft-partner

هل ترغب بارسال اشعارات عن اخر التحديثات في شمرا-اكاديميا