We prove a soundness and completeness result for Aschieri and Berardiʼs learning based realizability for Heyting Arithmetic plus Excluded Middle over semi-decidable statements with respect to 1-Backtracking Coquand game semantics. First, we prove that learning based realizability is sound with respect to 1-Backtracking Coquand game semantics. In particular, any realizer of an implication-and-negation-free arithmetical formula embodies a winning recursive strategy for the 1-Backtracking version of Tarski games. We also give examples of realizers and winning strategy extraction for some classical proofs. (...) Secondly, we extend our notion of realizability to a total recursive learning based realizability and show that the notion is complete with respect to 1-Backtracking Coquand game semantics. (shrink)

Gentzen's three consistency proofs for elementary number theory have a common aim that originates from Hilbert's Program, namely, the aim to justify the application of classical reasoning to quantified propositions in elementary number theory. In addition to this common aim, Gentzen gave a “finitist” interpretation to every number-theoretic proposition with his 1935 and 1936 consistency proofs. In the present paper, we investigate the relationship of this interpretation with intuitionism in terms of the debate between the Hilbert School and the Brouwer (...) School over the significance of consistency proofs. First, we argue that the interpretation had the role of responding to a Brouwer-style objection against the significance of consistency proofs. Second, we propose a way of understanding Gentzen's response to this objection from an intuitionist perspective. (shrink)

We introduce an implication-free fragment image of ω-arithmetic, having Exchange rule for sequents dropped. Exchange rule for formulas is, instead, an admissible rule in image. Our main result is that cut-free proofs of image are isomorphic with recursive winning strategies of a set of games called “1-backtracking games” in [S. Berardi, Th. Coquand, S. Hayashi, Games with 1-backtracking, Games for Logic and Programming Languages, Edinburgh, April 2005].We also show that image is a sound and complete formal system for the implication-free (...) fragment of LCM , Seventh International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3461, 2005, pp. 11–22. Invited paper]). A simple syntactical description of this fragment was still missing. No sound and complete formal system is known for LCM itself. (shrink)

The last section of “Lecture at Zilsel’s” [9, §4] contains an interesting but quite condensed discussion of Gentzen’s first version of his consistency proof for P A [8], reformulating it as what has come to be called the no-counterexample interpretation. I will describe Gentzen’s result (in game-theoretic terms), fill in the details (with some corrections) of Godel's reformulation, and discuss the relation between the two proofs.

We recall some of the early occurrences of the notions of interactivity and symmetry in the operational and denotational semantics of programming languages. We suggest some connections with ludics.

Classical proof forests are a proof formalism for first-order classical logic based on Herbrand’s Theorem and backtracking games in the style of Coquand. First described by Miller in a cut-free setting as an economical representation of first-order and higher-order classical proof, defining features of the forests are a strict focus on witnessing terms for quantifiers and the absence of inessential structure, or ‘bureaucracy’.This paper presents classical proof forests as a graphical proof formalism and investigates the possibility of composing forests by (...) cut-elimination. Cut-reduction steps take the form of a local rewrite relation that arises from the structure of the forests in a natural way. Yet reductions, which are significantly different from those of the sequent calculus, are combinatorially intricate and do not exclude the possibility of infinite reduction traces, of which an example is given.Cut-elimination, in the form of a weak normalisation theorem, is obtained using a modified version of the rewrite relation inspired by the game-theoretic interpretation of the forests. It is conjectured that the modified reduction relation is, in fact, strongly normalising. (shrink)

This book brings together philosophers, mathematicians and logicians to penetrate important problems in the philosophy and foundations of mathematics. In philosophy, one has been concerned with the opposition between constructivism and classical mathematics and the different ontological and epistemological views that are reflected in this opposition. The dominant foundational framework for current mathematics is classical logic and set theory with the axiom of choice. This framework is, however, laden with philosophical difficulties. One important alternative foundational programme that is actively pursued (...) today is predicativistic constructivism based on Martin-Löf type theory. Associated philosophical foundations are meaning theories in the tradition of Wittgenstein, Dummett, Prawitz and Martin-Löf. What is the relation between proof-theoretical semantics in the tradition of Gentzen, Prawitz, and Martin-Löf and Wittgensteinian or other accounts of meaning-as-use? What can proof-theoretical analyses tell us about the scope and limits of constructive and predicative mathematics? (shrink)

We associate with any game G another game, which is a variant of it, and which we call . Winning strategies for have a lower recursive degree than winning strategies for G: if a player has a winning strategy of recursive degree 1 over G, then it has a recursive winning strategy over , and vice versa. Through we can express in algorithmic form, as a recursive winning strategy, many common proofs of non-constructive Mathematics, namely exactly the theorems of the (...) sub-classical logic Limit Computable Mathematics [6], Hayashi and Nakata [7]). (shrink)

Should weak forms of the axiom of choice really be accepted within constructive mathematics? A critical view of the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov interpretation, accompanied by the intention to include nondeterministic algorithms, leads us to subscribe to Richman's appeal for dropping countable choice. As an alternative interpretation of intuitionistic logic, we propose to renew dialogue semantics.

We describe the constructive content of proofs in a fragment of propositional Infinitary Linear Logic in terms of strategies for a suitable class of games. Such strategies interpret linear proofs as parallel algorithms as long as the asymmetry of the connectives ? and ! allows it.

A pattern of interaction that arises again and again in programming is a 'handshake', in which two agents exchange data. The exchange is thought of as provision of a service. Each interaction is initiated by a specific agent--the client or Angel--and concluded by the other--the server or Demon. We present a category in which the objects--called interaction structures in the paper--serve as descriptions of services provided across such handshaken interfaces. The morphisms--called (general) simulations--model components that provide one such service, relying (...) on another. The morphisms are relations between the underlying sets of the interaction structures. The proof that a relation is a simulation can serve (in principle) as an executable program, whose specification is that it provides the service described by its domain, given an implementation of the service described by its codomain. This category is then shown to coincide with the subcategory of 'generated' basic topologies in Sambin's terminology, where a basic topology is given by a closure operator whose induced sup-lattice structure need not be distributive; and moreover, this operator is inductively generated from a basic cover relation. This coincidence provides topologists with a natural source of examples for non-distributive formal topology. It raises a number of questions of interest both for formal topology and programming. The extra structure needed to make such a basic topology into a real formal topology is then interpreted in the context of interaction structures. (shrink)

We tackle the problem of preservation of totality by composition in arena games. We first explain how this problem reduces to a finiteness theorem on what we call pointer structures, similar to the parity pointer functions of Harmer, Hyland and Mélliès and the interaction sequences of Coquand. We discuss how this theorem relates to normalization of linear head reduction in simply-typed lambda-calculus, leading us to a semantic realizability proof à la Kleene of our theorem. We then present another proof of (...) a more combinatorial nature. Finally, we discuss the exact class of strategies to which our theorems apply. (shrink)

Game semantics extends the Curry–Howard isomorphism to a three-way correspondence: proofs, programs, strategies. But the universe of strategies goes beyond intuitionistic logics and lambda calculus, to capture stateful programs. In this paper we describe a logical counterpart to this extension, in which proofs denote such strategies. The system is expressive: it contains all of the connectives of Intuitionistic Linear Logic, and first-order quantification. Use of Lairdʼs sequoid operator allows proofs with imperative behaviour to be expressed. Thus, we can embed first-order (...) Intuitionistic Linear Logic into this system, Polarized Linear Logic, and an imperative total programming language.The proof system has a tight connection with a simple game model, where games are forests of plays. Formulas are modelled as games, and proofs as history-sensitive winning strategies. We provide a strong full completeness result with respect to this model: each finitary strategy is the denotation of a unique analytic proof. Infinite strategies correspond to analytic proofs that are infinitely deep. Thus, we can normalise proofs, via the semantics. (shrink)

We consider two versions of truth as grounded in verification procedures: Dummett's notion of proof as an effective way to establish the truth of a statement and Hintikka's GTS notion of truth as given by the existence of a winning strategy for the game associated with a statement. Hintikka has argued that the two notions should be effective and that one should thus restrict one's attention to recursive winning strategies. In the context of arithmetic, we show that the two notions (...) do not coincide: on the one hand, proofs in PA do not yield recursive winning strategies for the associated game; on the other hand, there is no sound and effective proof procedure that captures recursive GTS truths. We then consider a generalized version of Game Theoretical Semantics by introducing games with backward moves. In this setting, a connection is made between proofs and recursive winning strategies. We then apply this distinction between two kinds of verificationist procedures to a recent debate about how we recognize the truth of Gödelian sentences. (shrink)