P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Extended abstract. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 1996, to appear. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Proof-search in Type-theoretic Languages: An Introduction - Galmiche, al. (2000) (1 citation) (Correct)
....complexity theory, have been investigated [95] and so it follows that linear logic proof search can be seen as a game. Such game is played 37 on formulae and its moves are instances of inference rules and the results issued from this approach are for instance lower bounds for local proof search [96]. The investigations about semantics can be the source of the design of new equivalent (sequent) calculi and induced proof search methods with good complexity results (for instance polynomial proof search systems) 5.4 Semantics for Search based Computation We have previously explained, in x 4.1 ....
P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 2(3), September 1996. 45
Employing Random Elements for Probabilistic Reasoning - Angelopoulos (1997) (Correct)
....biology, economics and related areas. The most notable features (that are of interest here) is that of players trying to maximise their pay off. This leads to elegant formulations of certain problems, and to intuitive ways of tackling them. Also some connections to proofs have been researched in [LMS96]. Mainly due to the above characteristics much research has currently taken these ideas over to the study of semantics for logics (to what is called game semantics, AJ] In this area techniques and ideas from game theory have been used and adapted to give semantics to a number of logics. 3 ....
P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Preliminary report, January 1996.
Proof-search in Type-theoretic Languages: An Introduction - Galmiche, Pym (2000) (1 citation) (Correct)
....in complexity theory, have been investigated [95] and so it follows that linear logic proof search can be seen as a game. Such game is played on formulae and its moves are instances of inference rules and the results issued from this approach are for instance lower bounds for local proof search [96]. The investigations about semantics can be the source of the design of new equivalent (sequent) calculi and induced proof search methods with good complexity results (for instance polynomial proof search systems) 5.4 Semantics for Search based Computation We have previously explained, in x ....
P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 2(3), September 1996.
The Complexity of Local Proof Search in Linear Logic - Lincoln, Mitchell, Scedrov (1996) Self-citation (Lincoln Mitchell Scedrov) (Correct)
.... ability to reflect computational states, events, and resources [11, 27, 28] Several notions of game semantics for linear logic are investigated in [6, 1, 2, 13, 17, 15, 9] Connections between linear logic proof search and probabilistic games considered in complexity theory are investigated in [20, 21, 22]. In particular, linear logic proof search may also be seen as a game. This game, the linear logic proof game, is played on linear logic formulas, and its moves are instances of inference rules of linear logic. There are two players, called proponent and opponent, and a separate verifier. ....
....by NSF Grant CCR 94 00907, by ONR Grant N00014 92J 1916, and by a Centennial Research Fellowship from the American Mathematical Society. 1 direction of proponent s evidence in a way that makes it impossible for proponent to obtain a formal proof. Several versions of this game are discussed in [21, 22], each with a numeric score that reflects the number of certain preferred axioms used in a complete or partial formal proof. The capabilities of the players may differ. While proponent is always omnipotent, in some versions of the game opponent s decisions are based only on a fair coin toss. Two ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Extended abstract. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 1996, to appear.
Optimization Complexity of Linear Logic Proof Games - Lincoln, Mitchell, Scedrov (1 citation) Self-citation (Lincoln Mitchell Scedrov) (Correct)
.... intrinsic ability to reflect computational states, events, and resources [13, 32, 33, 23] Several notions of game semantics for linear logic are investigated in [6, 1, 2, 15, 19, 17, 9] Connections between linear logic and probabilistic games considered in complexity theory are investigated in [24, 27, 25]. In particular, linear logic proof search may also be seen as a game. This game, the linear logic proof game, is played on linear logic formulas, and its moves are instances of inference rules of linear logic. There are two players, called proponent and opponent, and a separate verifier. ....
....of moves that constitute a formal proof of an input formula, consisting of axioms and matching inference rules. Opponent tries to force the direction of proponent s evidence in a way that makes it impossible for proponent to obtain a formal proof. Several versions of this game are discussed in [25, 27], each with a numeric score that reflects the number of certain preferred axioms used in a complete or partial formal proof. The capabilities of the players may differ. While proponent is always omnipotent, in some versions of the game opponent s decisions are based only on a fair coin toss. Two ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
P.D. Lincoln, J.C. Mitchell, and A. Scedrov. Linear logic proof games and optimization. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 2:322--338, 1996.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC