Interpreting Sequent Calculi as Client-Server Games | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Interpreting Sequent Calculi as Client-Server Games

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods (TABLEAUX 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10501))

  • 544 Accesses

Abstract

Motivated by the interpretation of substructural logics as resource-conscious reasoning, we introduce a client-server game characterizing provability in single-conclusion sequent calculi. The set up is modular and allows to capture multiple logics, including intuitionistic and (affine) linear intuitionistic logic. We also provide a straightforward interpretation of subexponentials, and moreover introduce a game where the information provided by the server is organized as a stack, rather than as a multiset or list.

Funded by FWF projects W1255-N23 and FWF P25417-G15 LOGFRADIG.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
JPY 3498
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
JPY 7435
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
JPY 9294
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Since we only care about winning strategies for \(\mathbf C \), the server \(\mathbf S \) may be viewed as acting nondeterministically or probabilistically, if preferred.

  2. 2.

    \(\bigwedge \varGamma \) denotes the conjunction of all formulas in \(\varGamma \).

  3. 3.

    We assume that \(\mathbf {LI}\) is already formulated using multisets - otherwise, this would be another difference between the calculi.

  4. 4.

    In these rules, the operations of replacing and removing an ip in a multiset are meant to affect only the active instance of the ip, rather than all instances of the ip in the multiset.

  5. 5.

    We remark that (W) is not admissible in \(\mathbf {IAL}\), even if one relaxes the axioms, because of the (!R)-rule. Our corresponding (\(\text {C}\textsc {heck}\)  !F)-rule is different: It could be written as

    figure g

    which has a built-in weakening.

  6. 6.

    We remark that the combination of the rules (!C), (!dR) and (!R\(^\omega \)) does define an exponential ! uniquely. However, cut is not admissible in the resulting system.

References

  1. Abramsky, S., Jagadeesan, R.: Games and full completeness for multiplicative linear logic. J. Symb. Log. 59(02), 543–574 (1994)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Blass, A.: A game semantics for linear logic. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 56(1), 183–220 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Danos, V., Joinet, J.-B., Schellinx, H.: The structure of exponentials: uncovering the dynamics of linear logic proofs. In: Gottlob, G., Leitsch, A., Mundici, D. (eds.) KGC 1993. LNCS, vol. 713, pp. 159–171. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). doi:10.1007/BFb0022564

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic: its syntax and semantics. In: Advances in linear logic (Ithaca, NY, 1993). London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 222, pp. 1–42. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Japaridze, G.: The intuitionistic fragment of computability logic at the propositional level. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 147(3), 187–227 (2007)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Keiff, L.: Dialogical logic. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, summer 2011 edition (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lafont,Y., Streicher, T.: Games semantics for linear logic. In: Proceedings of Sixth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS 1991, pp. 43–50. IEEE (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lorenzen, P.: Logik und Agon. In: Atti del XII Congresso Internazionale di Filosofia, vol. 4, pp. 187–194 (1960)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Paoli, F.: Substructural Logics: A Primer. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Rahman, S., Rückert, H.: Dialogical connexive logic. Synthese 127(1), 105–139 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Troelstra, A.S., Schwichtenberg, H.: Basic proof theory. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 43, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Christian G. Fermüller or Timo Lang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Fermüller, C.G., Lang, T. (2017). Interpreting Sequent Calculi as Client-Server Games. In: Schmidt, R., Nalon, C. (eds) Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods. TABLEAUX 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10501. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66902-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66902-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66901-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66902-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics