The Lambek calculus was introduced as a tool for examining linguistic constructions. Then this calculus was complemented with both new connectives and structural rules like contraction, weakening, and permutation. The structural rules are allowed only for formulas under the symbol of a specific modality called exponential. The Lambek calculus itself is a noncommutative structural logic, and for arbitrary formulas, the structural rules mentioned are not allowed. The next step is the introduction of a system of subexponentials: under the symbol of such a modality, only certain structural rules are admitted. The following question arises: is it possible to formulate a system with a certain version of the local contraction rule (for formulas under subexponential) to recover the cut elimination property? We consider two approaches to solving this problem: one can both weaken the rule of introducing ! in the right-hand side of a sequent (LSCLC) and extend the local contraction rule from individual formulas to their subsequents (LMCLC). It is also worth mentioning that in commutative calculi, such a problem is missing since formulas in a sequent are allowed to be permuted (i.e, the local contraction rule coincides with the nonlocal one). The following results are proved: cut eliminability in the LMCLC and LSCLC calculi; algorithmic decidability of fragments of these calculi in which ! is allowed to be applied only to variables; algorithmic undecidability of LMCLC (for LSCLC, decidability remains an open question); correctness and absence of strong completeness of LSCLC with respect to a class of relational models; various results on equivalence for the calculi in question and the calculi with other versions of the contraction subexponential.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
J. Lambek, “The mathematics of sentence structure,” Am. Math. Mon., 65, 154-170 (1958).
J.-Y. Girard, “Linear logic,” Theor. Comput. Sci., 50, No. 1, 1-102 (1987).
V. Nigam and D. Miller, “Algorithmic specifications in linear logic with subexponentials,” in Proc. 11th Int. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming (Coimbra, Portugal, September 7-9, 2009), 2009, pp. 129-140.
M. Kanovich, S. Kuznetsov, V. Nigam, and A. Scedrov, “Subexponentials in non-commutative linear logic,” Math. Struct. Comput. Sci., 29, No. 8, 1217-1249 (2019).
T. Braüner and V. de Paiva, “Cut-elimination for full intuitionistic linear logic,” BRICS Report RS-96-10, April 1996.
M. Kanovich, S. Kuznetsov, and A. Scedrov, “Undecidability of the Lambek calculus with a relevant modality,” in Lect. Not. Comput. Sci., 9804, Springer, Berlin (2016), pp. 240-256.
K. Chvalovsky and R. Horčik, “Full Lambek calculus with contraction is undecidable,” J. Symb. Log., 81, No. 2, 524-540 (2016).
H. Andréka and Sz. Mikulás, “Lambek calculus and its relational semantics: completeness and incompleteness,” J. Log. Lang. Inf., 3, No. 1, 1-37 (1994).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Translated from Algebra i Logika, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp. 401-423, July-August, 2022. Russian DOI: https://doi.org/10.33048/alglog.2022.61.402.
(M. V. Valinkin) Supported by the Council for Grants (under RF President), grant MK-1184.2021.1.1 and by Theoretical Physics and Mathematics Advancement Foundation “Basis.”
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Valinkin, M.V. Versions of a Local Contraction Subexponential in the Lambek Calculus. Algebra Logic 61, 271–287 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10469-023-09696-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10469-023-09696-0