The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Towards a geometry of interaction
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The resulting normal forms provide an attractive abstract level of information structure beyond brute details of syntax, and in the setting of linear logic, Girard 1987, 1989 has emphasized how proof normalization steps may be seen as communication moves, and hence as a form of information flow.”
From THE STORIES OF LOGIC AND INFORMATION (2008) · cites this paper as Girard 1989
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
THE STORIES OF LOGIC AND INFORMATION
van Benthem, J., & Martinez, M. (2008) · Philosophy of Information · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-51726-5.50012-1 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Girard, J.-Y.
- Corresponding author
- Girard, Jean-Yves
- Venue
- Contemporary Mathematics
- Publisher
- American Mathematical Society
- Published
- 1989
- Pages
- 69-108
- ISSN
- 0271-4132 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-3627
- OpenAlex
- W4238692953
- Cited by
- 146
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Contemporary mathematics - American Mathematical Society (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Logic, programming, and type systems
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Mathematical Physics › Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Algebra and Logic
- Keywords
- geometry of interaction, linear logic, proof nets, categorical semantics, sequent calculus
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
