Resource-distribution via Boolean Constraints

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 56-90

  Harland, James ^a   Pym, David ^b,c  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BATH   (United Kingdom)

^c University of Bath   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Algebras; Boolean constraints; Proof search; Relevant logics; Sequent calculus; Substructural logics

Indexed keywords

BOOLEAN CONSTRAINTS; PROOF-SEARCH; RELEVANT LOGICS; SEQUENT CALCULUS; SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS;

BOOLEAN ALGEBRA; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COMPUTER SCIENCE; FORMAL LOGIC; PROBLEM SOLVING;

CONSTRAINT THEORY;

EID: 0344994358     PISSN: 15293785     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/601775.601778     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. ANDREOLI, J.-M. 1992. Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic, J. Logic Computat. 2, 3, 297-347.
2. ANDREOLI, J.-M. 2001. Focussing and proof construction. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 107, 1-3, 131-163.
3. ARMELÍN, P. AND PYM, D. 2001. Bunched logic programming (extended abstract). In Proceedings of IJCAR 2001, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2083. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 289-304.
4. CERVESATO, I., HODAS, J. S., AND PFENNING, F. 2000. Efficient resource management for linear logic proof search. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 232, 1-2 (Feb.). Special issue on Proof Search in Type-Theoretic Languages, D. Galmiche and D. Pym, editors.
5. GABBAY, D. 1996. Labelled Deductive Systems: Principles and Applications, Vol. 1: Basic Principles. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
6. GALMICHE, D. 2000. Connection methods in linear logic and proof nets construction. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 232, 1-2, 231-272.
7. GALMICHE, D. AND MÉRY, D. 2001. Proof-search and countermodel generation in prepositional bi logic (extended abstract). In Fourth International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Software, TACS 2001, Sendai, Japan. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2215, Berlin, Germany, 263-282.
8. GALMICHE, D. AND MÉRY, D. In press. Semantic labelled tableaux for prepositional BI, I. J. Logic Computat.
9. GALMICHE, D., MÉRY, D., AND PYM, D. 2002. Resource tableaux (extended abstract). In Proceedings of CSL 2002, J. Bradfield, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2471. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 183-199.
10. GIRARD, J.-Y. 1987. Linear logic. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 50, 1-102.
11. GIRARD, J.-Y. 1994. Proof-Nets for Additives. Manuscript. Laboratoire de Mathematique Discrète, CNRS, Marseille, France.
12. HARLAND, J. AND PYM, D. 1997. Resource-distribution via boolean constraints (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-14), W. McCune, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1249. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 222-236.
13. HARLAND, J., PYM, D., AND WINIKOFF, M. 1996. Programming in Lygon: An overview. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST), M. Wirsing and M. Nivat, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1101. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 391-405.
14. HODAS, J. AND MILLER, D. 1994. Logic programming in a fragment of intuitionistic linear logic. Inform. Computat. 110, 2, 327-365.
15. KRIPKE, S. 1965. Semantical analysis of intuitionistic logic. In Formal Systems and Recursive Functions, J. Crossley and M. Dummett, Eds. North Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 92-130.
16. O'HEARN, P. AND PYM, D. 1999. The logic of bunched implications. Bull. Symbol. Logic 5, 2 (June), 215-244.
17. PYM, D. 1999. On bunched predicate logic. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (Trento, Italy). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 183-192.
18. PYM, D. 2002. The Semantics and Proof Theory of the Logic of Bunched Implications. Applied Logic Series, vol. 26. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
19. PYM, D. AND HARLAND, J. 1994. A uniform proof-theoretic investigation of linear logic programming. J. Logic Computat. 4, 2 (Apr.), 175-207.
20. PYM, D., O'HEARN, P., AND YANG, H. 2000. Possible worlds and resources: the semantics of BI. To appear: Theoretical Computer Science, 2003. Preprint available at www.bath.ac.uk/~cssdjp.
21. READ, S. 1988. Relevant Logic. Blackwell, London, U.K.
22. RESTALL, G. 2000. An Introduction to Substructural Logics. Routledge, London, U.K., and New York, NY.
23. TAMMET, T. 1994. Proof search strategies in linear logic. J. Automat. Reasoning 12, 3, 273-304.
24. TROELSTRA, A. 1992. Lectures on Linear Logic. CSLI Lecture Notes No. 29, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
25. URQUHART, A. 1972. Semantics for relevant logics. J. Symbol. Logic 37, 1, 159-169.
26. WINIKOFF, M. AND HARLAND, J. 1995. Implementing the linear logic programming language lygon. In Proceedings of the International Logic Programming Symposium (Portland), J. Lloyd, Ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 66-80.