Skip to main content
Log in

Proof strategies in linear logic

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Linear logic, introduced by J.-Y. Girard, is a refinement of classical logic providing means for controlling the allocation of “resources”. It has aroused considerable interest from both proof theorists and computer scientists. In this paper we investigate methods for automated theorem proving in propositional linear logic. Both the “bottom-up” (tableaux) and “top-down” (resolution) proof strategies are analyzed. Various modifications of sequent rules and efficient search strategies are presented along with the experiments performed with the implemented theorem provers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andreoli, J.-M.: Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic,J. Logic Computation 2(3) (1992), 297–347.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Galmiche, D. and Perrier, G.: Automated deduction in additive and multiplicative linear logic, inLFCS'92: Logic at Tver, LNCS 620, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992, pp. 151–162.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic,Theoret. Comput. Sci. 50 (1987), 1–102.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Harland, J. A. and Pym, D. J.: On resolution in fragments of classical linear logic, inLPAR'92, LNCS 624, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992, pp. 30–41.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hodas, J. and Miller, D.: Logic programming in a fragment of intuitionistic linear logic, inProc. 6th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Amsterdam, July 1991, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1991.

  6. Kleene, S. C.:Introduction to Metamathemaatics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lincoln, P., Mitchel, J., Scedrov, A., and Shankar, N.: Decision problems for propositional linear logic.Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 56(1–3) (1992), 239–311.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chirimar, J. and Lipton, J.: Provability in TBLL: A decision procedure, inCSL '91, LNCS 626, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992, pp. 53–67.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Maslov, S. Ju.: An inverse method of establishing deducibility in the classical predicate calculus,Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR 159 (1964), 17–20; Soviet Math. Dokl.5 (1964) 1420, MR 30 #3005.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Maslov, S. Ju.: The inverse method for establishing deducibility for logical calculi,Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov 98 (1968), 26–87;Proc. Steklov. Inst. Math. 98 (1968), 25–96, MR 40 #5416; 43 #4620.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Maslov, S. Ju.: Proof-search strategies for methods of the resolution type, inMachine Intelligence 6, American Elsevier, 1971, pp. 77–90.

  12. Mints, G.: Gentzen-type Systems and Resolution Rules. Part I. Propositional Logic, inCOLOG-88, LNCS 417, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990, pp. 198–231.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mints, G.: Resolution calculus for the first order linear logic,J. Logic, Language Informat. 2 (1993), 58–93.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Robinson, J. A.: A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle,J. ACM 12 (1965), 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tammet, T. Proof strategies in linear logic. J Autom Reasoning 12, 273–304 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00885763

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00885763

Key words

Navigation