We present a novel way of using proof nets for the multimodal Lambek calculus, which provides a general treatment of both the unary and binary connectives. We also introduce a correctness criterion which is valid for a large class of structural rules and prove basic soundness, completeness and cut elimination results. Finally, we will present a correctness criterion for the original Lambek calculus Las an instance of our general correctness criterion.

When we cut a multiplicative proof-net of linear logic in two parts we get two modules with a certain border. We call pretype of a module the set of partitions over its border induced by Danos-Regnier switchings. The type of a module is then defined as the double orthogonal of its pretype. This is an optimal notion describing the behaviour of a module: two modules behave in the same way precisely if they have the same type.In this paper we define (...) a procedure which allows to characterize (and calculate) the type of a module only exploiting its intrinsic geometrical properties and without any explicit mention to the notion of orthogonality. This procedure is simply based on elementary graph rewriting steps, corresponding to the associativity, commutativity and weak-distributivity of the multiplicative connectives of linear logic. (shrink)

Having defined a notion of homology for paired graphs, Métayer ([Ma]) proves a homological correctness criterion for proof nets, and states that for any proof net \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $G$\end{document} there exists a Jordan-Hölder decomposition of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} ${\mathsf H}_0(G)$\end{document}. This decomposition is determined by a certain enumeration of the pairs in \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $G$\end{document}. We correct his (...) proof of this fact and show that there exists a 1-1 correspondence between these Jordan-Hölder decompositions of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} ${\mathsf H}_0(G)$\end{document} and the possible ‘construction-orders’ of the par-net underlying \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $G$\end{document}. (shrink)

Having defined a notion of homology for paired graphs, Métayer ([Ma]) proves a homological correctness criterion for proof nets, and states that for any proof net $G$ there exists a Jordan-Hölder decomposition of ${\mathsf H}_0(G)$ . This decomposition is determined by a certain enumeration of the pairs in $G$ . We correct his proof of this fact and show that there exists a 1-1 correspondence between these Jordan-Hölder decompositions of ${\mathsf H}_0(G)$ and the possible ‘construction-orders’ of the par-net underlying $G$.