Ptarithmetic

The present article introduces ptarithmetic (short for "polynomial time arithmetic") -- a formal number theory similar to the well known Peano arithmetic, but based on the recently born computability logic (see http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~giorgi/cl.html) instead of classical logic. The formulas of ptarithmetic represent interactive computational problems rather than just true/false statements, and their "truth" is understood as existence of a polynomial time solution. The system of ptarithmetic elaborated in this article is shown to be sound and complete. Sound in the sense that every theorem T of the system represents an interactive number-theoretic computational problem with a polynomial time solution and, furthermore, such a solution can be effectively extracted from a proof of T. And complete in the sense that every interactive number-theoretic problem with a polynomial time solution is represented by some theorem T of the system. The paper is self-contained, and can be read without any previous familiarity with computability logic.Comment: Substantially better versions are on their way. Hence the present article probably will not be publishe

Introduction to Cirquent Calculus and Abstract Resource Semantics

This paper introduces a refinement of the sequent calculus approach called cirquent calculus. While in Gentzen-style proof trees sibling (or cousin, etc.) sequents are disjoint sequences of formulas, in cirquent calculus they are permitted to share elements. Explicitly allowing or disallowing shared resources and thus taking to a more subtle level the resource-awareness intuitions underlying substructural logics, cirquent calculus offers much greater flexibility and power than sequent calculus does. A need for substantially new deductive tools came with the birth of computability logic (see http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~giorgi/cl.html) - the semantically constructed formal theory of computational resources, which has stubbornly resisted any axiomatization attempts within the framework of traditional syntactic approaches. Cirquent calculus breaks the ice. Removing contraction from the full collection of its rules yields a sound and complete system for the basic fragment CL5 of computability logic. Doing the same in sequent calculus, on the other hand, throws out the baby with the bath water, resulting in the strictly weaker affine logic. An implied claim of computability logic is that it is CL5 rather than affine logic that adequately materializes the resource philosophy traditionally associated with the latter. To strengthen this claim, the paper further introduces an abstract resource semantics and shows the soundness and completeness of CL5 with respect to it.Comment: To appear in Journal of Logic and Computatio

Cirquent calculus deepened

Cirquent calculus is a new proof-theoretic and semantic framework, whose main distinguishing feature is being based on circuits, as opposed to the more traditional approaches that deal with tree-like objects such as formulas or sequents. Among its advantages are greater efficiency, flexibility and expressiveness. This paper presents a detailed elaboration of a deep-inference cirquent logic, which is naturally and inherently resource conscious. It shows that classical logic, both syntactically and semantically, is just a special, conservative fragment of this more general and, in a sense, more basic logic -- the logic of resources in the form of cirquent calculus. The reader will find various arguments in favor of switching to the new framework, such as arguments showing the insufficiency of the expressive power of linear logic or other formula-based approaches to developing resource logics, exponential improvements over the traditional approaches in both representational and proof complexities offered by cirquent calculus, and more. Among the main purposes of this paper is to provide an introductory-style starting point for what, as the author wishes to hope, might have a chance to become a new line of research in proof theory -- a proof theory based on circuits instead of formulas.Comment: Significant improvements over the previous version

On Polynomial Multiplication in Chebyshev Basis

In a recent paper Lima, Panario and Wang have provided a new method to multiply polynomials in Chebyshev basis which aims at reducing the total number of multiplication when polynomials have small degree. Their idea is to use Karatsuba's multiplication scheme to improve upon the naive method but without being able to get rid of its quadratic complexity. In this paper, we extend their result by providing a reduction scheme which allows to multiply polynomial in Chebyshev basis by using algorithms from the monomial basis case and therefore get the same asymptotic complexity estimate. Our reduction allows to use any of these algorithms without converting polynomials input to monomial basis which therefore provide a more direct reduction scheme then the one using conversions. We also demonstrate that our reduction is efficient in practice, and even outperform the performance of the best known algorithm for Chebyshev basis when polynomials have large degree. Finally, we demonstrate a linear time equivalence between the polynomial multiplication problem under monomial basis and under Chebyshev basis

Barnes Hospital Bulletin

https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/bjc_barnes_bulletin/1251/thumbnail.jp

Intuitionistic computability logic

Computability logic (CL) is a systematic formal theory of computational tasks and resources, which, in a sense, can be seen as a semantics-based alternative to (the syntactically introduced) linear logic. With its expressive and flexible language, where formulas represent computational problems and "truth" is understood as algorithmic solvability, CL potentially offers a comprehensive logical basis for constructive applied theories and computing systems inherently requiring constructive and computationally meaningful underlying logics. Among the best known constructivistic logics is Heyting's intuitionistic calculus INT, whose language can be seen as a special fragment of that of CL. The constructivistic philosophy of INT, however, has never really found an intuitively convincing and mathematically strict semantical justification. CL has good claims to provide such a justification and hence a materialization of Kolmogorov's known thesis "INT = logic of problems". The present paper contains a soundness proof for INT with respect to the CL semantics. A comprehensive online source on CL is available at http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~giorgi/cl.htm

Build your own clarithmetic I: Setup and completeness

Clarithmetics are number theories based on computability logic (see http://www.csc.villanova.edu/~japaridz/CL/ ). Formulas of these theories represent interactive computational problems, and their "truth" is understood as existence of an algorithmic solution. Various complexity constraints on such solutions induce various versions of clarithmetic. The present paper introduces a parameterized/schematic version CLA11(P1,P2,P3,P4). By tuning the three parameters P1,P2,P3 in an essentially mechanical manner, one automatically obtains sound and complete theories with respect to a wide range of target tricomplexity classes, i.e. combinations of time (set by P3), space (set by P2) and so called amplitude (set by P1) complexities. Sound in the sense that every theorem T of the system represents an interactive number-theoretic computational problem with a solution from the given tricomplexity class and, furthermore, such a solution can be automatically extracted from a proof of T. And complete in the sense that every interactive number-theoretic problem with a solution from the given tricomplexity class is represented by some theorem of the system. Furthermore, through tuning the 4th parameter P4, at the cost of sacrificing recursive axiomatizability but not simplicity or elegance, the above extensional completeness can be strengthened to intensional completeness, according to which every formula representing a problem with a solution from the given tricomplexity class is a theorem of the system. This article is published in two parts. The present Part I introduces the system and proves its completeness, while Part II is devoted to proving soundness