Studia Logica

, Volume 77, Issue 1, pp 9–40

Light Affine Set Theory: A Naive Set Theory of Polynomial Time

  • Kazushige Terui
Article

Abstract

In [7], a naive set theory is introduced based on a polynomial time logical system, Light Linear Logic (LLL). Although it is reasonably claimed that the set theory inherits the intrinsically polytime character from the underlying logic LLL, the discussion there is largely informal, and a formal justification of the claim is not provided sufficiently. Moreover, the syntax is quite complicated in that it is based on a non-traditional hybrid sequent calculus which is required for formulating LLL.

In this paper, we consider a naive set theory based on Intuitionistic Light Affine Logic (ILAL), a simplification of LLL introduced by [1], and call it Light Affine Set Theory (LAST). The simplicity of LAST allows us to rigorously verify its polytime character. In particular, we prove that a function over {0, 1}* is computable in polynomial time if and only if it is provably total inLAST.

naive set theory polynomial time linear logic light logic substructural logics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Asperti, A., ‘Light affine logic’, Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1998, pp. 300-308.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Asperti, A., and L. Roversi, ‘Intuitionistic light affine logic (proof-nets, normalization complexity, expressive power, programming notation)’, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 3(1): 137-175, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Baillot, P., ‘Stratified coherent spaces: a denotational semantics for light linear logic’, Theoretical Computer Science, to appear.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Barendregt, H. P., The Lambda Calculus: Its Syntax and Semantics, Elsevier North-Holland, 1981.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Cantini, A., ‘The undecidability of Grishin's set theory’, Studia Logica 74: 345-368, 2003.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Danos, V., and J.-B. Joinet, ‘Linear logic & elementary time’, Information and Computation 183(1): 123-137, 2003.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Girard, J.-Y., ‘Light linear logic’, Information and Computation 14(3): 175-204, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Girard, J.-Y., ‘Linear logic’, Theoretical Computer Science 50: 1-102, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Grishin, V. N., ‘A nonstandard logic and its application to set theory’, In Studies in Formalized Languages and Nonclassical Logics (Russian), Izdat, Nauka, Moskow, 1974, pp. 135-171.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Grishin, V. N., ‘Predicate and set theoretic calculi based on logic without contraction rules’ (Russian), Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR Seriya Matematicheskaya 45(1): 47-68, 1981. English translation in Math. USSR Izv. 18(1): 41–59, 1982.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hopcroft, J., and J. Ullman, Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass, 1979.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Kanovitch, M, M. Okada, and A. Scedrov, ‘Phase semantics for light linear logic’, Theoretical Computer Science 244(3): 525-549, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Komori, Y., ‘Illative combinatory logic based on BCK-logic’, Mathematica Japonica 34(4): 585-596, 1989.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Lincoln, P., A. Scedrov, and N. Shankar, ‘Decision problems for second order linear logic’, Proceedings of the Tenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1995, pp. 476-485.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Murawski, A. S., and C.-H. L. Ong, ‘Discreet games, light affine logic and PTIME computation’, Proceedings of Computer Science Logic 2000, Springer-Verlag, LNCS 1862, 2000, pp. 427-441.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Neergaard, P., and H. Mairson, ‘LAL is square: Representation and expressiveness in light affine logic’, presented at the Fourth International Workshop on Implicit Computational Complexity, 2002.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Peterson, U., ‘Logic without contraction as based on inclusion and unrestricted abstraction’, Studia Logica 64(3): 365-403, 2000.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Schwichtenberg, H., and A. S. Troelstra, Basic Proof Theory, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Shirahata, M., ‘A linear conservative extension of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory’, Studia Logica 56: 361-392, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Shirahata, M., ‘Fixpoint theorem in linear set theory’, unpublished manuscript, available at http://www.fbc.keio.ac.jp/~sirahata/Research, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Terui, K., ‘Light affine lambda calculus and polytime strong normalization’, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 2001, pp. 209-220. The full version is available at http://research.nii.ac.jp/~terui.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Terui, K., Light Logic and Polynomial Time Computation, PhD thesis, Keio University, 2002. Available at http://research.nii.ac.jp/~terui.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    White, R., ‘A demonstrably consistent type-free extension of the logic BCK’, Mathematica Japonica 32(1): 149-169, 1987.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    White, R., ‘A consistent theory of attributes in a logic without contraction’, Studia Logica 52: 113-142, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazushige Terui
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Informatics, 2-1-2 HitotsubashiJapan

Personalised recommendations