Modelling Multiplicative Linear Logic via Deep Inference
0
🤿
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Multiplicative linear logic is a well-studied formal system, with most research focused on the one-sided sequent calculus.
- This paper examines existing translations between a deep inference system and the standard sequent calculus, provides a simplified translation, and proves that a standard modeling approach is invariant to these translations.
- The paper also establishes a previously missing necessary condition for provable sequents related to the number of logical connectives in a formula.
Plain English Explanation
Multiplicative linear logic is a way of reasoning about how things interact and change over time. Researchers have extensively studied one particular version of this logic, called the one-sided sequent calculus. This paper takes a closer look at how this one-sided sequent calculus relates to another logical system called deep inference.
The authors provide a simplified way of translating between these two logical systems, and they formally prove that a standard approach to modeling real-world problems is unaffected by these translations. In other words, the way you model a problem doesn't depend on which logical system you use.
Along the way, the paper also identifies an important rule about the structure of formulas that must be true for a logical statement to be provable. This rule, which relates to the number of certain logical connectives in the formula, was previously missing from the literature on this topic.
Technical Explanation
The paper examines the relationship between the one-sided sequent calculus, which is the most widely studied formulation of multiplicative linear logic, and a deep inference system for the same logic. The authors provide a simplified translation between the two systems and prove that a standard approach to modeling real-world problems using this logic, known as the "MIX rule," is invariant to these translations.
Importantly, the paper also establishes a necessary condition for provable sequents in this logic. Specifically, it shows that the number of "par" and "tensor" connectives in a formula must satisfy a certain relationship for the formula to be provable. This technical result fills a gap in the existing literature on multiplicative linear logic.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a rigorous and valuable analysis of the connections between different formulations of multiplicative linear logic. The simplified translation between the sequent calculus and deep inference systems, as well as the proof of invariance under the MIX rule, are significant contributions that clarify the relationships between these logical frameworks.
One potential limitation is that the paper focuses solely on the multiplicative fragment of linear logic, without considering the additive connectives. Extending this analysis to the full linear logic system could be an interesting direction for future research.
Additionally, while the necessary condition for provable sequents is an important technical result, the paper does not explore the practical implications or potential applications of this finding. Further work could investigate how this structural property of formulas relates to the computational complexity or expressiveness of multiplicative linear logic.
Conclusion
This paper provides a detailed examination of the connections between different formulations of multiplicative linear logic, offering a simplified translation between the sequent calculus and deep inference systems, and proving the invariance of a standard modeling approach under these translations. Additionally, the paper establishes a previously missing necessary condition for provable sequents in this logic, relating to the structure of formulas. These results contribute to a deeper understanding of multiplicative linear logic and its properties, with potential implications for the application and study of this formal system.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤿
0
Modelling Multiplicative Linear Logic via Deep Inference
Tomer Galor, Andrea Schalk
Multiplicative linear logic is a very well studied formal system, and most such studies are concerned with the one-sided sequent calculus. In this paper we look in detail at existing translations between a deep inference system and the standard sequent calculus one, provide a simplified translation, and provide a formal proof that a standard approach to modelling is indeed invariant to all these translations. En route we establish a necessary condition for provable sequents related to the number of pars and tensors in a formula that seems to be missing from the literature.
Read more4/3/2024
🛠️
0
New!Temporal Many-valued Conditional Logics: a Preliminary Report
Mario Alviano, Laura Giordano, Daniele Theseider Dupr'e
In this paper we propose a many-valued temporal conditional logic. We start from a many-valued logic with typicality, and extend it with the temporal operators of the Linear Time Temporal Logic (LTL), thus providing a formalism which is able to capture the dynamics of a system, trough strict and defeasible temporal properties. We also consider an instantiation of the formalism for gradual argumentation.
Read more9/17/2024
0
Inductive Learning of Logical Theories with LLMs: A Complexity-graded Analysis
Jo~ao Pedro Gandarela, Danilo S. Carvalho, Andr'e Freitas
This work presents a novel systematic methodology to analyse the capabilities and limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs) with feedback from a formal inference engine, on logic theory induction. The analysis is complexity-graded w.r.t. rule dependency structure, allowing quantification of specific inference challenges on LLM performance. Integrating LLMs with formal methods is a promising frontier in the Natural Language Processing field, as an important avenue for improving model inference control and explainability. In particular, inductive learning over complex sets of facts and rules, poses unique challenges for current autoregressive models, as they lack explicit symbolic grounding. While they can be complemented by formal systems, the properties delivered by LLMs regarding inductive learning, are not well understood and quantified. Empirical results indicate that the largest LLMs can achieve competitive results against a SOTA Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) system baseline, but also that tracking long predicate relationship chains is a more difficult obstacle than theory complexity for the LLMs.
Read more9/2/2024
0
Learning to Estimate System Specifications in Linear Temporal Logic using Transformers and Mamba
.Ilker Ic{s}{i}k, Ebru Aydin Gol, Ramazan Gokberk Cinbis
Temporal logic is a framework for representing and reasoning about propositions that evolve over time. It is commonly used for specifying requirements in various domains, including hardware and software systems, as well as robotics. Specification mining or formula generation involves extracting temporal logic formulae from system traces and has numerous applications, such as detecting bugs and improving interpretability. Although there has been a surge of deep learning-based methods for temporal logic satisfiability checking in recent years, the specification mining literature has been lagging behind in adopting deep learning methods despite their many advantages, such as scalability. In this paper, we introduce autoregressive models that can generate linear temporal logic formulae from traces, towards addressing the specification mining problem. We propose multiple architectures for this task: transformer encoder-decoder, decoder-only transformer, and Mamba, which is an emerging alternative to transformer models. Additionally, we devise a metric for quantifying the distinctiveness of the generated formulae and a straightforward algorithm to enforce the syntax constraints. Our experiments show that the proposed architectures yield promising results, generating correct and distinct formulae at a fraction of the compute cost needed for the combinatorial baseline.
Read more6/3/2024