MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1758320073 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1503.00886

On Geometry of Interaction for Polarized Linear Logic

2015· preprint· en· W1758320073 on OpenAlexaff
Masahiro Hamano, Philip Scott

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear logicBimoduleMathematical proofMultiplicative functionMorphismPure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldCategorical variableMathematicsComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present Geometry of Interaction (GoI) models for Multiplicative Polarized Linear Logic, MLLP, which is the multiplicative fragment of Olivier Laurent's Polarized Linear Logic. This is done by uniformly adding multipoints to various categorical models of GoI. Multipoints are shown to play an essential role in semantically characterizing the dynamics of proof networks in polarized proof theory. For example, they permit us to characterize the key feature of polarization, focusing, as well as being fundamental to our construction of concrete polarized GoI models. Our approach to polarized GoI involves two independent studies, based on different categorical perspectives of GoI. (i) Inspired by the work of Abramsky, Haghverdi, and Scott, a polarized GoI situation is defined in which multipoints are added to a traced monoidal category equipped with a reflexive object $U$. Using this framework, categorical versions of Girard's Execution formula are defined, as well as the GoI interpretation of MLLP, proofs. Running the Execution formula is shown to characterize the focusing property (and thus polarities) as well as the dynamics of cut-elimination. (ii) The Int construction of Joyal-Street-Verity is another fundamental categorical structure for modelling GoI. Here, we investigate it in a multipointed setting. Our presentation yields a compact version of Hamano-Scott's polarized categories, and thus denotational models of MLLP. These arise from a contravariant duality between monoidal categories of positive and negative objects, along with an appropriate bimodule structure (representing "non-focused proofs") between them. Finally, as a special case of (ii) above, a compact model of MLLP is also presented based on Rel (the category of sets and relations) equipped with multi-points.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.109 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207