substructural fuzzy logics
play

Substructural Fuzzy Logics George Metcalfe Department of - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Substructural Fuzzy Logics George Metcalfe Department of Mathematics, Vanderbilt University July 2007 Fuzzy Logics / Substructural Logics Roughly speaking. . . Fuzzy logics have truth values in [0 , 1] and con- nectives interpreted by


  1. Substructural Fuzzy Logics George Metcalfe Department of Mathematics, Vanderbilt University July 2007

  2. Fuzzy Logics / Substructural Logics Roughly speaking. . . • Fuzzy logics have truth values in [0 , 1] and con- nectives interpreted by real-valued functions. • Substructural logics are obtained by removing/adding structural rules in Gentzen systems. . . . but are fuzzy logics substructural?

  3. t -Norm Fuzzy Logics The best known fuzzy logics have truth values in [0 , 1] and interpret conjunction and implication con- nectives by t -norms and their residua, e.g. t - NORM x ∗ y x → ∗ y max(0 , x + y − 1) min(1 , 1 − x + y ) Ł UKASIEWICZ G ¨ min( x, y ) y if x > y ; 1 o/w ODEL P RODUCT x · y y/x if x > y ; 1 o/w Valid formulas are those which always take value 1 .

  4. Uninorm Fuzzy Logics More generally, fuzzy logics can be based on uni- norms (commutative associative increasing binary functions on [0 , 1] with a unit element); e.g. � min( x, y ) if x + y ≤ 1 = x ∗ y max( x, y ) otherwise and their residua, defined as: x → ∗ y = sup { z ∈ [0 , 1] : x ∗ z ≤ y }

  5. Standard Algebras A fuzzy logic L is based on “standard L-algebras”: � [0 , 1] , ∗ , → ∗ , min , max , e ∗ , 0 , 1 � where ∗ is a uninorm with residuum → ∗ and unit e ∗ . LOGIC UNINORMS Uninorm Logic UL left-continuous uninorms Monoidal t -norm logic MTL left-continuous t -norms Basic Logic BL continuous t -norms odel Logic G idempotent t -norms G¨ = L A iff A is ≥ e in all standard L-algebras. |

  6. Sequents A (single-conclusion) sequent is an ordered pair: Γ ⇒ ∆ where Γ is a finite multiset of formulas and ∆ is a multiset containing at most one formula. We write Γ , Π and Γ , A for Γ ⊎ Π and Γ ⊎ { A } .

  7. A Simple Sequent Calculus Initial Sequents A ⇒ A (id) Logical Rules Γ ⇒ A Π , B ⇒ ∆ Γ , A ⇒ B Γ , Π , A → B ⇒ ∆ ( →⇒ ) Γ ⇒ A → B ( ⇒→ ) Cut Rule Γ , A ⇒ ∆ Π ⇒ A (cut) Γ , Π ⇒ ∆

  8. Some Structural Rules Weakening Γ ⇒ ∆ Γ ⇒ Γ , A ⇒ ∆ (wl) Γ ⇒ A (wr) Contraction Γ , A, A ⇒ ∆ (cl) Γ , A ⇒ ∆

  9. Some Substructural Logics Calculus Weakening Contraction GMAILL × GAMAILL GIL × ×

  10. Hypersequents A hypersequent G is a finite multiset of sequents: Γ 1 ⇒ ∆ 1 | . . . | Γ n ⇒ ∆ n

  11. From Sequents to Hypersequents The hypersequent version of a sequent rule adds a “context side-hypersequent” G ; e.g. G | Γ ⇒ A G | Π , B ⇒ ∆ G | Γ , A ⇒ B ( →⇒ ) G | Γ ⇒ A → B ( ⇒→ ) G | Γ , Π , A → B ⇒ ∆

  12. A Transfer Principle Take the initial sequents and hypersequent versions of the rules of a sequent calculus, and add: G | Γ ⇒ ∆ | Γ ⇒ ∆ G G | Γ ⇒ ∆ (ew) (ec) G | Γ ⇒ ∆

  13. 11 – A Transfer Principle and the “communication rule”: G | Γ 1 , Π 1 ⇒ ∆ G | Γ 2 , Π 2 ⇒ Σ (com) G | Γ 1 , Γ 2 ⇒ ∆ | Π 1 , Π 2 ⇒ Σ George Metcalfe, Vanderbilt University

  14. Transferred Calculi S EQUENT C ALCULUS H YPERSEQUENT C ALCULUS ⇒ GMAILL GUL ⇒ GAMAILL GMTL ⇒ GIL GG

  15. Soundness and Completeness We want to show that for a calculus GL : ⊢ GL ⇒ A | = L A iff We adopt the following strategy: (1) Let GL D be GL plus a “density” rule and prove: ⊢ GL D ⇒ A | = L A iff (2) Establish “density elimination” for GL D .

  16. The Takeuti-Titani Density Rule Let GL D be GL extended with: G | Γ , p ⇒ ∆ | Π ⇒ p (density) G | Γ , Π ⇒ ∆ where p does not occur in the conclusion. Under very general conditions, we get: ⊢ GL D ⇒ A | = L A iff

  17. Density Elimination Suppose that we have a proof ending in: . . . Γ , p ⇒ ∆ | Π ⇒ p (density) Γ , Π ⇒ ∆ Replace p on the left by Π ; on the right by Γ and ∆ . . . Γ , Π ⇒ ∆ | Γ , Π ⇒ ∆ (ec) Γ , Π ⇒ ∆ Make some adjustments to get a (density) -free proof. . .

  18. Putting Things Together ⇒ A is derivable in GL . . . . . . iff ⇒ A is derivable in GL D . . . . . . iff A is valid in all standard L-algebras.

  19. Uniform Conditions Single-conclusion hypersequent calculi with weak- ening admit cut and density elimination if they have: (a) Substitutive rules (making substitutions in a rule instance gives an admissible rule). (b) Reductive logical rules (applications of (cut) can be shifted upwards over logical rules). These conditions guarantee standard completeness.

  20. Concluding Remarks • Many fuzzy logics occur naturally as substruc- tural logics in the framework of hypersequents. • Syntactic conditions guarantee “standard com- pleteness” via cut and density elimination. • We are investigating more general conditions for density elimination.

  21. References Substructural Fuzzy Logics. George Metcalfe and Franco Mon- tagna. To Appear in Journal of Symbolic Logic . Density Elimination and Rational Completeness for First-Order Logics. Agata Ciabattoni and George Metcalfe. In Proceed- ings of LFCS 2007, volume 4514 of LNCS, pages 132-146, 2007 .

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend