Documentation

Linglib.Studies.Franke2011.Basic

Franke 2011: Quantity implicatures and rational conversation #

[Fra11], S&P 4(1): IBR (iterated best response) converges to exhaustive interpretation (exhMW; the paper writes ExhMM).

The IBR machinery (IBR.lean, ScalarGames.lean, Convergence.lean, RSABridge.lean) lives in this paper's directory over the shared InterpGame carrier. This file contains the exhaustification facts and worked examples:

Alternative counting ([Fra11] eq. (107)) #

def Franke2011.alternativeCount {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] (G : InterpGame T M) (s : T) :

Number of alternatives (messages) true at state s. This is |R⁻¹₀(s)| in Franke's notation.

Equations
Instances For
    def Franke2011.isMinimalByAltCount {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] (G : InterpGame T M) (m : M) (s : T) :

    A state s is minimal among m-worlds if no m-world has fewer true alternatives. This characterizes R₁(m) per equation (107).

    Equations
    Instances For

      Fact 1: R₁ ⊆ ExhMW ([Fra11] §10) #

      theorem Franke2011.r1_subset_exhMW {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] (G : InterpGame T M) (m : M) (s : T) (h : isMinimalByAltCount G m s) :

      Franke Fact 1 (containment direction): Level-1 receiver interpretation is contained in minimal-models exhaustification.

      R₁(mₛ) ⊆ ExhMM(S)

      Proof idea: If s is selected by R₁ (minimum alternative count), then s is minimal with respect to <_ALT because:

      • s' <_ALT s means s' makes strictly fewer alternatives true
      • But R₁ already selected for minimum alternative count
      • So no such s' can exist among m-worlds

      This is the containment direction; equality requires "homogeneity".

      Conditions for the converse (ExhMW ⊆ R₁) #

      def Franke2011.altOrderingTotalOnMessage {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] (G : InterpGame T M) (m : M) :

      The alternative ordering is total on m-worlds if for any two states where m is true, one's true alternatives are a subset of the other's.

      Equations
      Instances For
        theorem Franke2011.exhMW_subset_r1_under_totality {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] [DecidableEq M] (G : InterpGame T M) (m : M) (s : T) (hTotal : altOrderingTotalOnMessage G m) (hmw : Exhaustification.exhMW (toAlternatives G) (prejacent G m) s) :

        Converse direction under totality: ExhMW ⊆ R₁.

        When <_ALT is total on m-worlds, minimal in the subset ordering implies minimum cardinality.

        theorem Franke2011.r1_eq_exhMW_under_totality {T : Type u_1} {M : Type u_2} [Fintype M] [DecidableEq M] (G : InterpGame T M) (m : M) (s : T) (hTotal : altOrderingTotalOnMessage G m) :

        R₁ = ExhMW under totality: Full equivalence when alternatives form a chain.

        Totality is a sufficient condition for [Fra11]'s Fact 1 to become an equality; the paper's own sufficient condition is "homogeneity" of the alternative set.

        Fact 3: ExhMW ⊆ ExhIE ([Fra11] Appendix A) #

        Franke Fact 3 (Appendix A): ExhMW(S, Alt) ⊆ ExhIE(S, Alt)

        This is already proved as exhMW_entails_exhIE in Exhaustification/Operators/Basic.lean.

        Fact 4: ExhMW = ExhIE under closure ([Fra11] Appendix A) #

        Franke Fact 4 (Appendix A): ExhMW = ExhIE when Alt is closed under ∧.

        This is proved as exhMW_eq_exhIE_of_closedUnderConj in Exhaustification/Operators/Basic.lean.

        Scalar Implicature Example (Franke Section 3.1) #

        The classic "some" vs "all" example:

        IBR derivation:

        States for scalar implicature example

        Instances For
          @[implicit_reducible]
          Equations
          @[implicit_reducible]
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For

            Messages for scalar implicature example

            Instances For
              @[implicit_reducible]
              Equations
              @[implicit_reducible]
              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For

                Scalar implicature interpretation game

                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  The scalar implicature game IS a scalar game: truth sets are nested.

                  The scalar implicature game has distinct truth sets.

                  Free Choice Disjunction (Franke Section 3.3) #

                  "You may have cake or ice cream" → You may have either one.

                  States: {only-A, only-B, either, both} Messages: {◇A, ◇B, ◇(A∨B), ◇(A∧B)}

                  The free choice inference emerges from IBR reasoning because:

                  States for free choice example

                  Instances For
                    @[implicit_reducible]
                    Equations
                    @[implicit_reducible]
                    Equations
                    def Franke2011.instReprFCState.repr :
                    FCStateStd.Format
                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      Messages for free choice example

                      Instances For
                        @[implicit_reducible]
                        Equations
                        def Franke2011.instReprFCMessage.repr :
                        FCMessageStd.Format
                        Equations
                        Instances For

                          Free choice interpretation game

                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For