Skip to main content

True Concurrency of Deep Inference Proofs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic, Language, Information, and Computation (WoLLIC 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 9803))

  • 606 Accesses

Abstract

We give an event structures based true-concurrency characterization of deep inference proofs. The method is general to all deep inference systems that can be expressed as term rewriting systems. This delivers three consequences in a spectrum from theoretical to practical: the event structure characterization (i) provides a qualification of proof identity akin to proof nets for multiplicative linear logic and to atomic flows for classical logic; (ii) provides a concurrency theoretic interpretation for applications in logic programming; (iii) reduces the length of the proofs, and thereby extends the margin of proof search applications.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • 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

References

  1. Bruscoli, P., Guglielmi, A.: On the proof complexity of deep inference. ACM Trans. Computat. Logic 2(14), 1–34 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic: Its syntax and semantics. In: Girard, J.-Y., Lafont, Y., Regnier, L. (eds.) Advances in Linear Logic (Proceedings of the Workshop on Linear Logic, Cornell University), vol. 222. Cambridge University Press (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Guglielmi, A.: Abstract Logic Programming in Linear Logic Independence and Causality in a First Order Calculus. Ph.D. thesis, Universita di Pisa (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Guglielmi, A.: A system of interaction and structure. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 8(1), 1–64 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Guglielmi, A., Gundersen, T.: Normalisation control in deep inference via atomic flows. Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 4(1:9), 1–36 (2008)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Guglielmi, A., Gundersen, T., Parigot, M.: A proof calculus which reduces syntactic bureaucracy. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications 2010 (Edinburgh), pp. 135–150. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik 2010 LIPIcs (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kahramanoğulları, O.: System BV is NP-complete. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 152(1–3), 107–121 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Kahramanoğulları, O.: On linear logic planning and concurrency. Inform. Comput. 207(11), 1229–1258 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Kahramanoğulları, O.: Interaction and depth against nondeterminism in proof search. Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 10(2:5), 1–49 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Kahramanoğulları, O.: Maude as a platform for designing and implementing deep inference systems. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Rule-Based Programming, RULE 2007. ENTCS, vol. 219, pp. 35–50. Elsevier (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kanovich, M.: The multiplicative fragment of linear logic is NP-complete. Technical Report X-91-13, Institute for Language, Logic, and Information (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Miller, D.: Forum: a multiple-conclusion specification logic. Theor. Comput. Sci. 165, 201–232 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller, D.: Overview of linear logic programming. In: Ehrhard, T., Girard, J.-Y., Ruet, P., Scott, P. (eds.) Linear Logic in Computer Science. London Mathematical Society Lecture Note, vol. 316. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sassone, V., Nielsen, M., Winskel, G.: Models for concurrency: towards a classification. Theor. Comput. Sci. 170(1–2), 297–348 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Strassburger, L., Guglielmi, A.: A system of interaction and structure IV: The exponentials anddecomposition. ACM Trans. Comp. Logic 12(4), 1–39 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Winskel, G., Nielsen, M.: Models for concurrency. In: Abramsky, S., Gabbay, D.M., Maibaum, T.S.E. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, vol. 4, pp. 1–148. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kahramanoğulları, O. (2016). True Concurrency of Deep Inference Proofs. In: Väänänen, J., Hirvonen, Å., de Queiroz, R. (eds) Logic, Language, Information, and Computation. WoLLIC 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9803. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-52921-8_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-52921-8_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-52920-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-52921-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics