Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T13:26:47.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The undecidability theorem for the Horn-like fragment of linear logic (Revisited)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2016

MAX KANOVICH
MAX KANOVICH*
Affiliation:
University College London, UK. Email: m.kanovich@ucl.ac.uk National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There has been an increased interest in the decision problems for linear logic and its fragments. Here, we give a fully self-contained, easy-to-follow, but fully detailed, direct and constructive proof of the undecidability of a very simple Horn-like fragment of linear logic, which is accessible to a wide range of people. Namely, we show that there is a direct correspondence between terminated computations of a Minsky machine M and cut-free linear logic derivations for a Horn-like sequent of the form

\begin{equation*} \bang{\Phi_M},\ l_1 \vdash l_0, \end{equation*}
where ΦM consists only of Horn-like implications of the following simple forms
\begin{equation*} (l \llto l'),\ \ ((l\otimes r) \llto l'),\ \ (l\llto (r\otimes l')),\ \ and \ \ (l\llto (l'\oplus l'')), \end{equation*}
where l1, l0, l, l′, l″ and r stand for literals.

Neither negation, nor &, nor constants, nor embedded implications/bangs are used here.

Furthermore, our particular correspondence constructed above provides decidability for each of the Horn-like fragments whenever we confine ourselves to any two forms of the above Horn-like implications, along with the complexity bounds that come from the proof.

Type
Paper
Information
Mathematical Structures in Computer Science , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , June 2016 , pp. 719 - 744
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Girard, J.-Y. (1987). Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50 (1)1–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard, J.-Y. (1995). Linear logic: Its syntax and semantics. In: Girard, J.-Y., Lafont, Y. and Regnier, L. (eds.) Advances in Linear Logic, London Mathematical Society Lecture Notes, volume 222, Cambridge University Press 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanovich, M. (1995). The direct simulation of Minsky machines in linear logic. In: Girard, J.-Y., Lafont, Y. and Regnier, L. (eds.) Advances in Linear Logic, London Mathematical Society Lecture Notes, volume 222, Cambridge University Press 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosaraju, R.S. (1982). Decidability of reachability in vector addition systems. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing 267–281. Preliminary Version.Google Scholar
Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J., Scedrov, A. and Shankar, N. (1992). Decision problems for propositional linear logic. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 56 (1–3)239–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. (1984). An algorithm for the general Petri net reachability problem. SIAM Journal on Computing 13 (3)441–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minsky, M. (1961). Recursive unsolvability of Post's problem of ‘tag’ and other topics in the theory of Turing machines. Annals of Mathematics 74 (3)437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar