Translations of intuitionistic logic
m (→Call-by-name Girard's translation A\imp B \mapsto \oc{A}\limp B: use of \rulename) |
m (→Call-by-value translation A\imp B \mapsto \oc{(A\limp B)}: use of \rulename) |
||
Line 312: | Line 312: | ||
<math> |
<math> |
||
− | \LabelRule{\textit{ax}} |
+ | \LabelRule{\rulename{ax}} |
\NulRule{A\vdash A} |
\NulRule{A\vdash A} |
||
\DisplayProof |
\DisplayProof |
||
\qquad\mapsto\qquad |
\qquad\mapsto\qquad |
||
− | \LabelRule{\textit{ax}} |
+ | \LabelRule{\rulename{ax}} |
\NulRule{A^v\vdash A^v} |
\NulRule{A^v\vdash A^v} |
||
\DisplayProof |
\DisplayProof |
||
Line 326: | Line 326: | ||
\AxRule{\Gamma\vdash A} |
\AxRule{\Gamma\vdash A} |
||
\AxRule{\Delta,A\vdash B} |
\AxRule{\Delta,A\vdash B} |
||
− | \LabelRule{\textit{cut}} |
+ | \LabelRule{\rulename{cut}} |
\BinRule{\Gamma,\Delta\vdash B} |
\BinRule{\Gamma,\Delta\vdash B} |
||
\DisplayProof |
\DisplayProof |
||
Line 332: | Line 332: | ||
\AxRule{\Gamma^v\vdash A^v} |
\AxRule{\Gamma^v\vdash A^v} |
||
\AxRule{\Delta^v,A^v\vdash B^v} |
\AxRule{\Delta^v,A^v\vdash B^v} |
||
− | \LabelRule{\textit{cut}} |
+ | \LabelRule{\rulename{cut}} |
\BinRule{\Gamma^v,\Delta^v\vdash B^v} |
\BinRule{\Gamma^v,\Delta^v\vdash B^v} |
||
\DisplayProof |
\DisplayProof |
||
Line 580: | Line 580: | ||
If we define <math>(\Gamma\vdash A)^{\underline{v}} = \oc{\Gamma^{\underline{v}}}\vdash\oc{A^{\underline{v}}}</math>, we have <math>(\Gamma\vdash A)^{\underline{v}} = (\Gamma\vdash A)^v</math> and thus we obtain the same translation of proofs. |
If we define <math>(\Gamma\vdash A)^{\underline{v}} = \oc{\Gamma^{\underline{v}}}\vdash\oc{A^{\underline{v}}}</math>, we have <math>(\Gamma\vdash A)^{\underline{v}} = (\Gamma\vdash A)^v</math> and thus we obtain the same translation of proofs. |
||
− | |||
== Call-by-value Girard's translation <math>A\imp B \mapsto \oc{(A\limp B)}</math> == |
== Call-by-value Girard's translation <math>A\imp B \mapsto \oc{(A\limp B)}</math> == |
Revision as of 23:17, 12 February 2009
The genesis of linear logic comes with a decomposition of the intuitionistic implication. Once linear logic properly defined, it corresponds to a translation of intuitionistic logic into linear logic, often called Girard's translation. In fact Jean-Yves Girard has defined two translations in his linear logic paper[1]. We call them the call-by-name translation and the call-by-value translation.
These translations can be extended to translations of classical logic into linear logic.
Contents |
Call-by-name Girard's translation
Formulas are translated as:
This is extended to sequents by .
This allows one to translate the rules of intuitionistic logic into linear logic:
Call-by-value translation
Formulas are translated as:
The translation of any formula starts with , we define such that .
The translation of sequents is .
This allows one to translate the rules of intuitionistic logic into linear logic:
We use .
Alternative presentation
It is also possible to define as the primitive construction.
If we define , we have and thus we obtain the same translation of proofs.
Call-by-value Girard's translation
The original version of the call-by-value translation given by Jean-Yves Girard[1] is an optimisation of the previous one using properties of positive formulas.
Formulas are translated as:
The translation of any formula is a positive formula.
The translation of sequents is .
This allows one to translate the rules of intuitionistic logic into linear logic:
We use .
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Girard, Jean-Yves. Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science. Volume 50, Issue 1, pp. 1-101, doi:10.1016/0304-3975(87)90045-4, 1987.