Skip to main content

A Game Model for Proofs with Costs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods (TABLEAUX 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11714))

Abstract

We look at substructural calculi from a game semantic point of view, guided by certain intuitions about resource conscious and, more specifically, cost conscious reasoning. To this aim, we start with a game, where player defends a claim corresponding to a (single-conclusion) sequent, while player tries to refute that claim. Branching rules for additive connectives are modeled by choices of , while branching for multiplicative connectives leads to splitting the game into parallel subgames, all of which have to be won by player to succeed. The game comes into full swing by adding cost labels to assumptions, and a corresponding budget. Different proofs of the same end-sequent are interpreted as more or less expensive strategies for to defend the corresponding claim. This leads to a new kind of labelled calculus, which can be seen as a fragment of (subexponential linear logic). Finally, we generalize the concept of costs in proofs by using a semiring structure, illustrate our interpretation by examples and investigate some proof-theoretical properties.

Olarte and Pimentel are funded by CNPq, CAPES and the project FWF START Y544-N23. Lang is supported by FWF project W1255-N23.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /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
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abramsky, S., Jagadeesan, R.: Games and full completeness for multiplicative linear logic. J. Symb. Log. 59(2), 543–574 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Accattoli, B., Graham-Lengrand, S., Kesner, D.: Tight typings and split bounds. PACMPL, 2(ICFP), 94:1–94:30 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bistarelli, S., Gadducci, F.: Enhancing constraints manipulation in semiring-based formalisms. In: Brewka, G., Coradeschi, S., Perini, A., Traverso, P. (eds.) ECAI 2006, 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems (PAIS 2006), Proceedings. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 141, pp. 63–67. IOS Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bistarelli, S., Montanari, U., Rossi, F., Schiex, T., Verfaillie, G., Fargier, H.: Semiring-based CSPs and valued CSPs: frameworks, properties, and comparison. Constraints 4(3), 199–240 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Blass, A.: Some semantical aspects of linear logic. Log. J. IGPL 5(4), 487–503 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. 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). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0022564

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Delande, O., Miller, D., Saurin, A.: Proof and refutation in MALL as a game. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 161(5), 654–672 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Deng, Y., Simmons, R.J., Cervesato, I.: Relating reasoning methodologies in linear logic and process algebra. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 26(5), 868–906 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Fermüller, C.G., Lang, T.: Interpreting sequent calculi as client-server games. In: Schmidt, R.A., Nalon, C. (eds.) TABLEAUX 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10501, pp. 98–113. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66902-1_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Hyland, J.M.E., Ong, C.h.L.: Fair games and full completeness for multiplicative linear logic without the mix-rule (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Japaridze, G.: A constructive game semantics for the language of linear logic. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 85(2), 87–156 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Lamarche, F.: Games semantics for full propositional linear logic. In: Proceedings, 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, San Diego, California, USA, 26–29 June 1995, pp. 464–473. IEEE Computer Society (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lang, T., Olarte, C., Pimentel, E., Fermüller, C.: A Game Model for Proofs with Costs. arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1906.11742, June 2019

  16. Lorenzen, P.: Logik und agon. Atti Del XII Congresso Internazionale di Filosofia 4, 187–194 (1960)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Melliès, P.-A.: Asynchronous games 4: a fully complete model of propositional linear logic. In: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 2005), Chicago, IL, USA, 26–29 June 2005, pp. 386–395. IEEE Computer Society (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Miller, D.: The \({\uppi }\)-calculus as a theory in linear logic: preliminary results. In: Lamma, E., Mello, P. (eds.) ELP 1992. LNCS, vol. 660, pp. 242–264. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-56454-3_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Nigam, V., Miller, D.: Algorithmic specifications in linear logic with subexponentials. In: Porto, A., López-Fraguas, F.J. (eds.) PPDP, pp. 129–140. ACM (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dutilh Novaes, C., French, R.: Paradoxes and structural rules from a dialogue perspective. Philos. Issues 28, 129–158 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pimentel, E., Olarte, C., Nigam, V.: A proof theoretic study of soft concurrent constraint programming. TPLP 14(4–5), 649–663 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Straßburger, L.: MELL in the calculus of structures. Theor. Comput. Sci. 309(1–3), 213–285 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Straßburger, L., Guglielmi, A.: A system of interaction and structure IV: the exponentials and decomposition. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 12(4), 23:1–23:39 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Olarte .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Lang, T., Olarte, C., Pimentel, E., Fermüller, C.G. (2019). A Game Model for Proofs with Costs. In: Cerrito, S., Popescu, A. (eds) Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods. TABLEAUX 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11714. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29026-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29026-9_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29025-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29026-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics