Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Hybrid linear logic, revisited

  • KAUSTUV CHAUDHURI (a1), JOËLLE DESPEYROUX (a2), CARLOS OLARTE (a3) and ELAINE PIMENTEL (a4)

Abstract

HyLL (Hybrid Linear Logic) is an extension of intuitionistic linear logic (ILL) that has been used as a framework for specifying systems that exhibit certain modalities. In HyLL, truth judgements are labelled by worlds (having a monoidal structure) and hybrid connectives (at and ↓) relate worlds with formulas. We start this work by showing that HyLL's axioms and rules can be adequately encoded in linear logic (LL), so that one focused step in LL will correspond to a step of derivation in HyLL. This shows that any proof in HyLL can be exactly mimicked by a LL focused derivation. Another extension of LL that has extensively been used for specifying systems with modalities is Subexponential Linear Logic (SELL). In SELL, the LL exponentials (!, ?) are decorated with labels representing locations, and a pre-order on such labels defines the provability relation. We propose an encoding of HyLL into SELL (SELL plus quantification over locations) that gives better insights about the meaning of worlds in HyLL. More precisely, we identify worlds as locations, and show that a flat subexponential structure is sufficient for representing any world structure in HyLL. This shows that HyLL's monoidal structure is not reflected in LL derivations, hence not increasing the expressiveness of LL, from a proof theoretical point of view. We conclude by proposing the notion of fixed points in multiplicative additive HyLL (μHyMALL), which can be encoded into multiplicative additive linear logic with fixed points (μMALL). As an application, we propose encodings of Computational Tree Logic (CTL) into both μMALL and μHyMALL. In the former, states are represented as atoms in the linear context, hence reflecting a more operational view of CTL connectives. In the latter, worlds represent states of the transition system, thus exhibiting a pleasant similarity with the semantics of CTL.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Arias, J., Desainte-Catherine, M., Olarte, C. and Rueda, C. (2015). Foundations for reliable and flexible interactive multimedia scores. In: Collins, T., Meredith, D. and Volk, A. (eds.) MCM 2015, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9110, Springer, 2941.
Andreoli, J.-M. (1992). Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 2 (3) 297347.
Baelde, D. (2012). Least and greatest fixed points in linear logic. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 13 (1) 2.
Burch, J.R., Clarke, E.M., McMillan, K.L., Dill, D.L. and Hwang, L.J. (1992). Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. Information and Computation 98 (2) 142170.
Clarke, E.M. and Emerson, E.A. (1981). Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In: Kozen, D. (ed.) Logics of Programs, Workshop, Yorktown Heights, May 1981, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 131, New York: Springer, 5271.
Chaudhuri, K. (2010). Classical and intuitionistic subexponential logics are equally expressive. In: Dawar, A. and Veith, H. (eds.) CSL 2010, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6247, Springer, 185199.
Church, A. (1940). A formulation of the simple theory of types. The Jornal of Symbolic Logic 5 5668.
Cervesato, I. and Pfenning, F. (2002). A linear logical framework. Information and Computation 179 (1) 1975.
Caires, L., Pfenning, F. and Toninho, B. (2016). Linear logic propositions as session types. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 26 (3) 367423.
Chaudhuri, K. and Reis, G. (2015). An adequate compositional encoding of bigraph structure in linear logic with subexponentials. In: Davis, M., Fehnker, A., McIver, A. and Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR-20 2015, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9450, Springer, 146161.
Despeyroux, J. and Chaudhuri, K. (2014). A hybrid linear logic for constrained transition systems. In: Post-Proc. of TYPES 2013, Leibniz Intl. Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 26, Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 150168.
Danos, V., Joinet, J.-B. and Schellinx, H. (1993). The structure of exponentials: Uncovering the dynamics of linear logic proofs. In: Gottlob, G., Leitsch, A. and Mundici, D. (eds.) Kurt Gödel Colloquium, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 713, Springer, 159171.
de Maria, E., Despeyroux, J. and Felty, A. (2014). A logical framework for systems biology. In: Proceedings of the 1st Intl. Conference on Formal Methods in Macro-Biology (FMMB), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8738, Springer, 136–155.
Despeyroux, J., Olarte, C. and Pimentel, E. (2017). Hybrid and subexponential linear logics. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 332 95111.
Girard, J.-Y. (1987). Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50 1102.
Miller, D. (1992). Unification under a mixed prefix. Journal of Symbolic Computation 14 (4) 321358.
Miller, D. and Pimentel, E. (2013). A formal framework for specifying sequent calculus proof systems. Theoretical Computer Science 474 98116.
Nigam, V. (2014). A framework for linear authorization logics. Theoretical Computer Science 536 2141.
Nigam, V. and Miller, D. (2009). Algorithmic specifications in linear logic with subexponentials. In: Porto, A. and López-Fraguas, F.J. (eds.) PPDP, ACM, 129140.
Nigam, V. and Miller, D. (2010). A framework for proof systems. Journal of Automated Reasoning 45 (2) 157188.
Nigam, V., Olarte, C. and Pimentel, E. (2013). A general proof system for modalities in concurrent constraint programing. In: CONCUR, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8052, Springer Verlag, 410424.
Nigam, V., Olarte, C. and Pimentel, E. (2017). On subexponentials, focusing and modalities in concurrent systems. Theoretical Computer Science 693 3558.
Nigam, V., Pimentel, E. and Reis, G. (2011). Specifying proof systems in linear logic with subexponentials. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 269 109123.
Nigam, V., Pimentel, E. and Reis, G. (2016). An extended framework for specifying and reasoning about proof systems. Journal of Logic and Computation 26 (2) 539576.
Olarte, C., Chiarugi, D., Falaschi, M. and Hermith, D. (2016). A proof theoretic view of spatial and temporal dependencies in biochemical systems. Theoretical Computer Science 641 2542.
Olarte, C., Pimentel, E. and Nigam, V. (2015). Subexponential concurrent constraint programming. Theoretical Computer Science 606 98120.
Olarte, C., Pimentel, E. and Rueda, C. (2018). A concurrent constraint programming interpretation of access permissions. TPLP 18 (2) 252295.
Pimentel, E., Olarte, C. and Nigam, V. (2014). A proof theoretic study of soft concurrent constraint programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 14 475–308.
Reed, J. (2006). Hybridizing a logical framework. In: International Workshop on Hybrid Logic (HyLo), Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, Seattle, USA, Elsevier, 135148.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Mathematical Structures in Computer Science
  • ISSN: 0960-1295
  • EISSN: 1469-8072
  • URL: /core/journals/mathematical-structures-in-computer-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed