Advertisement

Yet another correctness criterion for Multiplicative Linear Logic with MIX

  • Andrea Asperti
  • Giovanna Dore
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 813)

Abstract

A new correctness criterion for discriminating Proof Nets among Proof Structures of Multiplicative Linear Logic with MIX rule is provided. This criterion is inspired by an original interpretation of Proof Structures as distributed systems, and logical formulae as processes. The computation inside a system corresponds to the logical flow of information inside a proof, that is, roughly, a distributed version of Girard's token trip. Proof Nets are then characterised as deadlock free Proof Structures (deadlock free distributed systems). This result follows by considering the causal dependencies among logical formulae inside proofs, and it provides a new understanding of notions like acyclicity, chains, and empires in terms of concurrent computations.

Keywords

Causal Chain Linear Logic Logical Formula Causal Dependency Correctness Criterion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [As91]
    A. Asperti. A linguistic approach to deadlock. Rapport de Recherche du Laboratoire d'Informatique de l'Ecole Normale Supérieure de Paris, LIENS-91-15, October 1991.Google Scholar
  2. [Be90]
    G. Bellin. Mechanizing Proof theory: Resource-Aware Logics and Proof-Transformations to Extract Implicit Information. Ph.D Thesis, Report CST-80-91, Dpt. of Computer Science, Univ. of Edinburgh. June 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [Be93]
    G. Bellin. Proof Nets for Multiplicative and Additive Linear Logic. Draft, 1993 (early version as Report LFCS-91-161, May 1991, Dept. of Comp. Science, Univ. of Edinburgh.)Google Scholar
  4. [BK92]
    G. Bellin, J. Ketonen. A decison procedure revisited: Notes on direct logic, linear logic and its implementation. Theoretical Computer Science, n.95, pp. 115–142. 1992.Google Scholar
  5. [BW93]
    G. Bellin, J. van de Wiele. Proof Nets and Typed lambda Calculus. I. Empires and Kingdoms. Draft. 1993.Google Scholar
  6. [Da90]
    V. Danos. La Logique Linéaire appliquée à l'étude de divers processus de normalisation. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris VII. 1990.Google Scholar
  7. [DR89]
    V. Danos, L. Regnier. The Structure of Multiplicatives. Arch. Math. Logic, 28. 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [FR91]
    A. Fleury, C. Retoré. The MIX rule. Draft. 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [Gi86]
    J. Y. Girard. Linear Logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 50. 1986.Google Scholar
  10. [KW84]
    J. Ketonen, R. Weyhrauch. A Decidable Fragment of Predicate Calculus. Theoretical Computer Science 32. 1984.Google Scholar
  11. [Ret90]
    C. Retoré. A First Move from non Commutative Linear Logic to True Concurrency: the calculus of ordered sequents. Draft. 1990.Google Scholar
  12. [Ret93]
    C. Retoré. Réseaux et Séquents Ordonnés. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris VII. 1993.Google Scholar
  13. [Ro90]
    D. Roorda. Quantum Graphs and Proof Nets. Draft. 1990.Google Scholar
  14. [Ro91]
    D. Roorda. Resource Logics: Proof-theoretical Investigations. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Amsterdam. 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Asperti
    • 1
  • Giovanna Dore
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di MatematicaBolognaItaly
  2. 2.DSlogicsBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations