Sequent calculi of quantum logic with strict implication

Transcription

1 CTFM /7 Sequent calculi of quantum logic with strict implication Tokyo Institute of Technology Graduate School of Information Science and Engineering Tomoaki Kawano

2 About quantum logic Sequent calculi for quantum logic with implication Labeled sequent for quantum logic and cut elimination

3 1 Quantum Logic Quantum Logic is one of Non-classical logic which is based on proposition of quantum physics.

4 Quantum logic does not satisfies the Distributive law A (B C) = (A B) (A C)

5 Quantum logic does not satisfies the Distributive law A (B C) = (A B) (A C) Quantum Logic + Distributive law = Classical Logic Intuitionistic Logic + Excluded middle = Classical Logic

6 1.1 Semantics of quantum logic Orthomodular lattice (Ortho lattice : Minimal quantum logic) Kripke model

7 Ortho lattice (B,,,,, 1, 0) a B, a = a a b b a a a = 0, a a = 1 a b = (a b )

8 Distributive law is not satisfied in both of these lattice. a (b a ) (a b) (a a )

9 Quantum logic is based on closed subspace of Hilbert space.

10 O-model is triple (X,, V ) X: non empty set. : binary relation on X which is irreflexive and symmetric. V : function assigning each propositional variable p to a -closed subset of X. Given Y X, Y = {x X for all y in Y, x y}. We say that Y is -closed if Y = Y.

11

12 Set Y

13 Set Y Set Y

14 Set Y Set Y Y = Y

15 Set Y

16 Set Y Set Y

17 Set Y Set Y Y = Y

18 Assign formula to Kripke model V ( A) = V (A) V (A B) = V (A) V (B) V (A B) = {x X y(x /y and y V (A) then y V (B))} We use A B as an abbreviation of ( A B)

19 Example

20 Example

21 Example

22 Example

23 Distributive law is not satisfied in this model. A (B A) = A ( B A) = A (A B) (A A) = =

24 2 Sequent calculi for minimal quantum logic

25 Sequent calculus GO (Nishimura 1980) Axiom: Rules: A A Γ, A A, Π Σ Γ, Π, Σ (cut) A, Γ A B, Γ ( L) Γ Π, Γ, Σ (extension) B, Γ A B, Γ ( L) Γ, A Γ, B Γ, A B ( R) Γ, A A, Γ ( L) A, Γ A, Γ ( L) A A ( R) Γ, A Γ, A ( R)

26 GO does not include implication. We can add implication rule as below. GOI A (A B), B ( ) Γ 1, A B, 1 Γ 2, A B, 2... Γ 2 n, A B, 2 n C 1 D 1, C 2 D 2,..., C n D n A B ( R) where, 0 n, Γ i = {D j j γ(i)}, i = {C j j δ(i)}, δ(i), γ(i) is i-th element of all divisions of {1,..., n} Example if n = 2, A B, C 1, C 2 D 1, A B, C 2 D 2, A B, C 1 D 1, D 2, A B C 1 D 1, C 2 D 2 A B (

27 GO does not satisfy cut elimination. This is the example of sequent which cannot be proved without cut.

28 3 Labeled (Tree ) sequent

29 Example : Labeled sequent of intuitionistic logic. TLJ (Kashima)

30 4 Labeled sequent of quantum logic TGOI Axiom and rules for is same to TLJ. There is no rule for as is an abbreviation. Γ, b : A b : B, Γ a : A B, Γ ( L) b : A, Γ, b : B Γ, a : A B ( R) b : A, Γ Γ, a : A ( ) ( L) : b and a are related by /. ( R), ( ) : b and a are related by / and only A and B or A exists in b. b is deleted in lower sequent.

31 Γ, a : A a : A, Γ Γ (cut)

32 ( R) before (In these pictures, relation is /. Not.)

33 ( R) after (In these pictures, relation is /. Not.)

34 ( R) before 2 (In these pictures, relation is /. Not.)

35 ( ) before (In these pictures, relation is /. Not.)

36 ( ) after (In these pictures, relation is /. Not.)

37 Completeness of TGOI Theorem If TGOI / a : A (only one node a exists), then, there exist O-model (X,, V ) and x X which satisfy x =/A. We can see that this sequent system has cut elimination theorem because we can prove completeness without cut rule.

38 Proof: We made (X,, V ) by the 2 steps algorithm. step 1 Expand the frame with preserving the unprovability without the ( ) rule. We continue this step until no rules can be apply. step 2 Expand the frame with ( ) rure. We only apply this to all propositional variable in right side of sequent.

39 We continue these 2 steps until it become to practical end state (In this algorithm, there is infinite loop. So we have to terminate this somewhere. Fortunately, there is a state that meaning of which is no more changeable. We call this practical end state.)

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48 If we continue this, we are going to infinite loop like next page. I omit the detail but the meaning of this model is same to the model in previous page. So, the model in previous page is practical end state. The red circles are the point which we want to attach V (A). Although the set of red is not -closed set, it can be extended to the -closed set by lemma. Blue points are V ( A). Furthermore, there is no contradict point like A A or A A.

49

50

51

52

53 Theorem TGOI a : A (only one node a exists). GOI A We can prove the formula which we saw before without cut rule.

54

55 [1] HANDBOOK OF PHILOSOPHICAL LOGIC 2nd EDITION 6 D.M.Gabbay and F.Guenthner [2] Material implication in orthomodular (and boolean) lattices, notre dame journal of formal logic, 22, Gary M. Hardegree [3] A Comparison of Implications in Orthomodular Quantum Logic Morphological Analysis of Quantum Logic International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical SciencesVolume 2012 (2012), Mitsuhiko Fujio [4] Minimal Quantum Logic with Merged Implications International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 26, No. 9, 1987 Mladen Pavicic [5] H. Nishimura. Proof Theory for Minimal Quantum Logic I. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 33(1):103113, [6] H. Nishimura. Sequential Method in Quantum Logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 45(2):339352, 1980 [7] Gentzen-Like Methods in Quantum Logic. Uwe Egly and Hans Tompits [8] J. GUNSON, On the algebraic structure of quantum mechanics, Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 6 (1967) [9] QL [10] [11] ( )

56 Thank you for listening!