ILLC-LIRa

illc-lira@list.uva.nl

1 participants
582 discussions

TbiLLC 2017: last call for papers (deadline extended!)
by LIRa Seminar 21 Mar '17

21 Mar '17

Last Call for Papers THE TWELFTH INTERNATIONAL TBILISI SYMPOSIUM ON LANGUAGE, LOGIC AND COMPUTATION 18-22 September, 2017 Kakheti, Georgia http://events.illc.uva.nl/Tbilisi/Tbilisi2017/ *********************************************************************** CALL FOR PAPERS The Twelfth International Tbilisi Symposium on Language, Logic and Computation will be held on 18-22 September 2017 in Kakheti, Georgia. The Programme Committee invites submissions for contributions on all aspects of language, logic and computation. Work of an interdisciplinary nature is particularly welcome. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to: * Natural language syntax, semantics, and pragmatics * Linguistic typology and semantic universals * Language evolution and learnability * Historical linguistics, history of logic * Natural logic, inference and entailment in natural language * Logic, games, and formal pragmatics * Logics for artificial intelligence * Constructive, modal and algebraic logic * Algorithmic game theory * Computational social choice * Formal models of multiagent systems * Information retrieval, query answer systems * Distributional and probabilistic models of information and meaning Authors can submit an abstract of three pages (including references) at the EasyChair conference system here: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=tbillc2017 PROGRAMME The programme will include the following tutorials and a series of invited lecturers. Tutorials: Language: Jakub Szymanik (University of Amsterdam) Logic: Sam van Gool (City College of New York and University of Amsterdam) Computation: Ana Sokolova (University of Salzburg) Invited speakers: Language: Gemma Boleda (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) Ruth Kempson (King\'s College, London) Logic: Alexander Kurz (University of Leicester) Eric Pacuit (University of Maryland) Computation: Dexter Kozen (Cornell University) Alex Simpson (University of Ljubljana) Workshops There will also be a workshop on \"Language entitled Signs and gestures -- exploring the divide between sign language and speech-accompanying gestures\" organised by Daniel Hole (University of Stuttgart) and a workshop on Logic & Computation organised by Alex Simpson (University of Ljubljana) and Alexander Kurz (University of Leicester). More information will be available on the TbiLLC website: http://events.illc.uva.nl/Tbilisi/Tbilisi2017/ Programme Committee Samson Abramsky (Oxford University) Kata Balogh (University of Duesseldorf) Guram Bezhanishvili (New Mexico State University) Nick Bezhanishvili (ILLC, University of Amsterdam) Rajesh Bhatt (UMass Amherst) Filippo Bonchi (University of Pisa) Valeria De Paiva (University of Birmingham) David Gabelaia (TSU, Razmadze Mathematical Institute) Brunella Gerla (University of Insubria) Nina Gierasimczuk (ILLC, University of Amsterdam) Helle Hvid Hansen (Delft University of Technology) Daniel Hole (University of Stuttgart) George Metcalfe (University of Bern) Alessandra Palmigiano (Delft University of Technology) Wiebke Petersen (Chair, University of Duesseldorf) Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (Queen Mary University of London) Alexandra Silva (Chair, University College London) Sonja Smets (ILLC, University of Amsterdam) Rui Soares Barbosa (University of Oxford) Luca Spada (University of Salerno) Carla Umbach (Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, ZAS, Berlin) Galit W. Sassoon (Bar Ilan University) Henk Zeevat (ILLC, University of Amsterdam) PUBLICATION INFORMATION Post-proceedings of the symposium will be published in the LNCS series of Springer. IMPORTANT DATES Submission deadline: 1 April 2017 Notification: 1 June 2017 Final abstracts due: 1 July 2017 Registration deadline: 1 August 2017 Symposium: September 18-22, 2017 Programme and submission details can be found at: http://events.illc.uva.nl/Tbilisi/Tbilisi2017/

1 0

Friday: LIRa session with Pierre Cardascia
by LIRa Seminar 21 Mar '17

21 Mar '17

Dear all, this Friday we will have our next LIRa session. Speaker: Pierre Cardascia Date and Time: Friday, March 24th 2017, 15:30-17:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: The dialogic of matrices -- Technical aspects of the actualism in game semantic. Abstract. The game semantics and more specially the dialogical logic are logical frameworks designed to follow the dynamics of information into interactive structure such as dialogues or programs. The natural interpretations of their semantics are pragmatist ones and develop the idea that it is the use which makes the sense of analysed sentences rather than a calculus on pre-given truth-values or an external denotations. But philosophically, this internalism suffers of his own success : in everyday\'s life, we didn\'t work on time-closed interactions, the whole history of the uses of a word is never available, and never required. To overcome this problem and some subsequent issues, we propose a brand new analysis, which change the ``localisation\'\' of interactions. Instead of focusing on the history of the dialogue (and so the history of the uses), the justification of each move or action has to be found in the actual trace of the past events into the ``present state of the dialogue\'\': the position (which is a matrice). Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

TODAY: LIRa session with Greg Restall
by LIRa Seminar 06 Mar '17

06 Mar '17

Dear all, today we will have our next LIRa session. There will be no LIRa on Friday this week. Speaker: Greg Restall (University of Melbourne) Date and Time: Monday, March 6th 2017, 16:00-17:30 Venue: *KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107* Title: Proof Terms for Classical Derivations. Abstract. I give an account of proof terms for derivations in a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. The term for a derivation δ of a sequent Σ≻Δ encodes how the premises Σ and conclusions Δ are related in δ. This encoding is many–to–one in the sense that different derivations can have the same proof term, since different derivations may be different ways of representing the same underlying connection between premises and conclusions. However, not all proof terms for a sequent Σ≻Δ are the same. There may be different ways to connect those premises and conclusions. Proof terms can be simplified in a process corresponding to the elimination of cut inferences in sequent derivations. However, unlike cut elimination in the sequent calculus, each proof term has a unique normal form (from which all cuts have been eliminated) and it is straightforward to show that term reduction is strongly normalising — every reduction process terminates in that unique normal form. Further- more, proof terms are invariants for sequent derivations in a strong sense — two derivations δ1 and δ2 have the same proof term if and only if some permutation of derivation steps sends δ1 to δ2 (given a relatively natural class of permutations of derivations in the sequent calculus). Since not every derivation of a sequent can be permuted into every other derivation of that sequent, proof terms provide a non-trivial account of the identity of proofs, independent of the syntactic representation of those proofs. Link: http://consequently.org/writing/proof-terms-for-classical-derivations/ Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow: LIRa session with Greg Restall
by LIRa Seminar 05 Mar '17

05 Mar '17

Dear all, tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session. Speaker: Greg Restall (University of Melbourne) Date and Time: Monday, March 6th 2017, 16:00-18:00 Venue: KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107. Title: Proof Terms for Classical Derivations. Abstract. I give an account of proof terms for derivations in a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. The term for a derivation δ of a sequent Σ≻Δ encodes how the premises Σ and conclusions Δ are related in δ. This encoding is many–to–one in the sense that different derivations can have the same proof term, since different derivations may be different ways of representing the same underlying connection between premises and conclusions. However, not all proof terms for a sequent Σ≻Δ are the same. There may be different ways to connect those premises and conclusions. Proof terms can be simplified in a process corresponding to the elimination of cut inferences in sequent derivations. However, unlike cut elimination in the sequent calculus, each proof term has a unique normal form (from which all cuts have been eliminated) and it is straightforward to show that term reduction is strongly normalising — every reduction process terminates in that unique normal form. Further- more, proof terms are invariants for sequent derivations in a strong sense — two derivations δ1 and δ2 have the same proof term if and only if some permutation of derivation steps sends δ1 to δ2 (given a relatively natural class of permutations of derivations in the sequent calculus). Since not every derivation of a sequent can be permuted into every other derivation of that sequent, proof terms provide a non-trivial account of the identity of proofs, independent of the syntactic representation of those proofs. Link: http://consequently.org/writing/proof-terms-for-classical-derivations/ Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

MONDAY! LIRa session with Greg Restall
by LIRa Seminar 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Dear all, please note that our next LIRa session is on Monday! Speaker: Greg Restall (University of Melbourne) Date and Time: Monday, March 6th 2017, 16:00-18:00 Venue: KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107. Title: Proof Terms for Classical Derivations. Abstract. I give an account of proof terms for derivations in a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. The term for a derivation δ of a sequent Σ≻Δ encodes how the premises Σ and conclusions Δ are related in δ. This encoding is many–to–one in the sense that different derivations can have the same proof term, since different derivations may be different ways of representing the same underlying connection between premises and conclusions. However, not all proof terms for a sequent Σ≻Δ are the same. There may be different ways to connect those premises and conclusions. Proof terms can be simplified in a process corresponding to the elimination of cut inferences in sequent derivations. However, unlike cut elimination in the sequent calculus, each proof term has a unique normal form (from which all cuts have been eliminated) and it is straightforward to show that term reduction is strongly normalising — every reduction process terminates in that unique normal form. Further- more, proof terms are invariants for sequent derivations in a strong sense — two derivations δ1 and δ2 have the same proof term if and only if some permutation of derivation steps sends δ1 to δ2 (given a relatively natural class of permutations of derivations in the sequent calculus). Since not every derivation of a sequent can be permuted into every other derivation of that sequent, proof terms provide a non-trivial account of the identity of proofs, independent of the syntactic representation of those proofs. Link: http://consequently.org/writing/proof-terms-for-classical-derivations/ Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Today (at Oost-Indisch Huis!): SMART Lecture by Vincent F. Hendricks
by LIRa Seminar 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Dear all, unfortunately the location for the lecture today which we announced previously via email and on the website was not correct. The event will be in E0.02 (VOC-zaal), Oost-Indisch Huis, Kloveniersburgwal 48. http://smartcs.uva.nl/shared-content/events/events/events/2016-2017/vincent… The SMART Lecture will be presented by Vincent F. Hendricks, with an introduction by Sonja Smets. Date: Friday, March 3rd 2017, 16:00-17:30 Title: Bubbles Go Bust Speaker: Vincent F. Hendricks (University of Copenhagen) Location: E0.02 (VOC-zaal), Oost-Indisch Huis, Kloveniersburgwal 48 | 1012 CX Amsterdam +31 (0)20 525 2258 Abstract: Besides champagne, bubbles are typically associated with situations in finance in which assets trade at prices far exceeding their fundamental value. That was the way of the Dutch tulip bulb frenzy in the 1630s and the subprime crises in 2008. The market overheated, bubbles went bust with catastrophic consequences. But bubbles are not confined to the world of finance. In fact one may today speak of information bubbles, status bubbles, bullying bubbles, political bubbles, news bubbles, even science bubbles. Vincent F. Hendricks, Professor of Formal Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Information and Bubble Studies at the University of Copenhagen, walks you through bubble studies using a wide range of entertaining, thought-provoking and disconcerting examples from the world of finance, social media, politics, populism, fake news and post-factual democracy. On the way he punctures some of the most inflated tendencies of today\'s public debate especially on social media. Bio: Vincent F. Hendricks is Professor of Formal Philosophy at The University of Copenhagen. He is Director of the Center for Information and Bubble Studies (CIBS) sponsored by the Carlsberg Foundation. Hendricks has been awarded a number of national and international prizes for his research among them the Elite Research Prize by the Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, the Roskilde Festival Elite Research Prize, The Rosenkjær Prize by the Danish Broadcasting Company, and the Choice Magazine Outstanding Title Award. He was Editor-in-Chief of Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and Philosophy of Science between 2005-2015. http://smartcs.uva.nl/shared-content/events/events/events/2016-2017/vincent… Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

SMART lecture on Friday, LIRa session on Monday
by LIRa Seminar 01 Mar '17

01 Mar '17

Dear all, please note there will be no LIRa this Friday, but you are invited to attend the SMART Lecture presented by Vincent F. Hendricks, with an introduction by Sonja Smets. The next LIRa session will be on Monday with Greg Restall. ---- Date: Friday, March 3rd 2017, 16:00-17:30 Title: Bubbles Go Bust Speaker: Vincent F. Hendricks (University of Copenhagen) Venue: Room F0.01, Oudemanhuispoort 4-6, 1012 CN Amsterdam Abstract: Besides champagne, bubbles are typically associated with situations in finance in which assets trade at prices far exceeding their fundamental value. That was the way of the Dutch tulip bulb frenzy in the 1630s and the subprime crises in 2008. The market overheated, bubbles went bust with catastrophic consequences. But bubbles are not confined to the world of finance. In fact one may today speak of information bubbles, status bubbles, bullying bubbles, political bubbles, news bubbles, even science bubbles. Vincent F. Hendricks, Professor of Formal Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Information and Bubble Studies at the University of Copenhagen, walks you through bubble studies using a wide range of entertaining, thought-provoking and disconcerting examples from the world of finance, social media, politics, populism, fake news and post-factual democracy. On the way he punctures some of the most inflated tendencies of today\'s public debate especially on social media. Link: http://smartcs.uva.nl/shared-content/events/events/events/2016-2017/vincent… ---- Date and Time: Monday, March 6th 2017, 16:00-18:00 Title: Proof Terms for Classical Derivations. Speaker: Greg Restall (University of Melbourne) Venue: KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107. Abstract. I give an account of proof terms for derivations in a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. The term for a derivation δ of a sequent Σ≻Δ encodes how the premises Σ and conclusions Δ are related in δ. This encoding is many–to–one in the sense that different derivations can have the same proof term, since different derivations may be different ways of representing the same underlying connection between premises and conclusions. However, not all proof terms for a sequent Σ≻Δ are the same. There may be different ways to connect those premises and conclusions. Proof terms can be simplified in a process corresponding to the elimination of cut inferences in sequent derivations. However, unlike cut elimination in the sequent calculus, each proof term has a unique normal form (from which all cuts have been eliminated) and it is straightforward to show that term reduction is strongly normalising — every reduction process terminates in that unique normal form. Further- more, proof terms are invariants for sequent derivations in a strong sense — two derivations δ1 and δ2 have the same proof term if and only if some permutation of derivation steps sends δ1 to δ2 (given a relatively natural class of permutations of derivations in the sequent calculus). Since not every derivation of a sequent can be permuted into every other derivation of that sequent, proof terms provide a non-trivial account of the identity of proofs, independent of the syntactic representation of those proofs. Link: http://consequently.org/writing/proof-terms-for-classical-derivations/ ---- Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow: LIRa session with Laurenz Hudetz (Room F3.20!)
by LIRa Seminar 09 Feb '17

09 Feb '17

Dear all, tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session. PLEASE NOTE: We will be in the KdVI Seminar Room F3.20. Speaker: Laurenz Hudetz Date and Time: Friday, February 10th 2017, 15:30-17:00 Venue: KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107. Title: Remarks on formal criteria of theory equivalence. Abstract. Philosophers of science have recently developed increased interest in formal criteria of theory equivalence (Andréka, Madarász and Németi 2008, Barrett and Halvorson 2016, Halvorson 2016, Weatherall 2016). The two most important criteria presently discussed are: (1) generalised definitional equivalence (or generalised bi-interpretability), (2) categorical equivalence (i.e. equivalence of categories of models). After presenting these criteria and their motivations, I introduce a strengthening of categorical equivalence, called `definable categorical equivalence\', which takes into account the internal structure of models (in contrast to categorical equivalence). I illustrate the properties of this criterion by means of examples. Then I address questions about the relationships between these criteria, in particular: (a) For which theories does definable categorical equivalence imply generalised bi-interpretability? (b) For which theories does generalised bi-interpretability imply definitional equivalence? Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Next Friday: LIRa session with Laurenz Hudetz
by LIRa Seminar 05 Feb '17

05 Feb '17

Dear all, on Friday we will have our next LIRa session. NOTE: We will be in the KdVI Seminar Room F3.20. Speaker: Laurenz Hudetz Date and Time: Friday, February 10th 2017, 15:30-17:00 Venue: KdVI Seminar Room F3.20, Science Park 107. Title: Remarks on formal criteria of theory equivalence. Abstract. Philosophers of science have recently developed increased interest in formal criteria of theory equivalence (Andréka, Madarász and Németi 2008, Barrett and Halvorson 2016, Halvorson 2016, Weatherall 2016). The two most important criteria presently discussed are: (1) generalised definitional equivalence (or generalised bi-interpretability), (2) categorical equivalence (i.e. equivalence of categories of models). After presenting these criteria and their motivations, I introduce a strengthening of categorical equivalence, called `definable categorical equivalence\', which takes into account the internal structure of models (in contrast to categorical equivalence). I illustrate the properties of this criterion by means of examples. Then I address questions about the relationships between these criteria, in particular: (a) For which theories does definable categorical equivalence imply generalised bi-interpretability? (b) For which theories does generalised bi-interpretability imply definitional equivalence? Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow: Joint LIRa-DIP Session with Alessandro Giordani
by LIRa Seminar 02 Feb '17

02 Feb '17

Dear all, tomorrow we will have a joint LIRa-DIP Session. Speaker: Alessandro Giordani (Catholic University of Milan) Date and Time: Friday, February 3rd 2017, 15:30-17:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: An Evidence-based logic of Acceptance and Rejection. Abstract: In this paper, I am going to present logics of acceptance and rejection based on the idea that these epistemic states are frame-dependent, where a frame for an epistemic state is assumed to consist of a triple (Σ, I, S), where (i) Σ is a set of subject matters, (ii) I is a set of sources of justification, and (iii) S is a set of reference epistemic standards. The central intuition underlying such an approach is that states of acceptance and rejection are connected to epistemic justifications, where a justification is intended as a subjective ground for assuming a proposition p as a solution to a specific problem relative to subject matter σ ∈ Σ, a solution that derives from a source i ∈ I and satisfies a standard s ∈ S. In modeling this kind of states, I will extend the usual systems of epistemic logic in two directions: (i) by introducing a partition of the epistemic space into cells, corresponding to different conceptual frames; (ii) by making explicit the reference to justifiers, corresponding to elements of evidence for asserting propositions. The first step allows us to introduce a local approach to the epistemic space, thus generalizing the standard global approach. The second step allows us to generalize the constructive approach according to which assertibility has to be intended as having a procedure to obtain a proof of a proposition. As we will see, the resulting system is extremely powerful from an analytical point of view. In particular, within the system, it is possible both to provide an intuitive interpretation of the phenomena of para-completeness and para-consistency connected to rejection and to assume an intermediate standpoint on the problem as to whether rejection is to be intended as having a proof of the negation of a proposition or rather as not having a proof of the proposition. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

← Newer
1
...
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
...
59
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

ILLC-LIRa