← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:1912.00012 · v2
Negative Translations for Affine and Lukasiewicz Logic
首次提交 2019-11-29 22:07
版本更新 2026-10-29 19:22
雷达观测 2026-10-30 13:28
摘要
We investigate four well-known negative translations of classical logic into intuitionistic logic within a substructural setting. We find that in \emph{affine logic} the translation schemes due to Kolmogorov and Gödel both satisfy Troelstra's criteria for a negative translation. On the other hand, the schemes of Glivenko and Gentzen both fail for affine logic, but for different reasons: one can extend affine logic to make Glivenko work and Gentzen fail and {\it vice versa}. By contrast, in the setting of \emph{Łukasiewicz logic}, we can prove a general result asserting that a wide class of formula translations including those of Kolmogorov, Gödel, Gentzen and Glivenko not only satisfy Troelstra's criteria with respect to a natural intuitionistic fragment of Łukasiewicz logic but are all equivalent.
作者备注：arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1404.0570
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v2 · 2026-10-29 19:22 · 最新观测版本
Negative Translations for Affine and Lukasiewicz Logic
We investigate four well-known negative translations of classical logic into intuitionistic logic within a substructural setting. We find that in \emph{affine logic} the translation schemes due to Kolmogorov and Gödel both satisfy Troelstra's criteria for a negative translation. On the other hand, the schemes of Glivenko and Gentzen both fail for affine logic, but for different reasons: one can extend affine logic to make Glivenko work and Gentzen fail and {\it vice versa}. By contrast, in the setting of \emph{Łukasiewicz logic}, we can prove a general result asserting that a wide class of formula translations including those of Kolmogorov, Gödel, Gentzen and Glivenko not only satisfy Troelstra's criteria with respect to a natural intuitionistic fragment of Łukasiewicz logic but are all equivalent.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗