Display calculi in non-classical logics
|
|
- Maria Richards
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Display calculi in non-classical logics Revantha Ramanayake Vienna University of Technology (TU Wien) Prague seminar of substructural logics March 28 29, 2014 Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 1 / 51
2 Hilbert s Program (around 1922) Proofs are the essence of mathematics to establish a theorem.. present a proof! Historically, proofs were not the objects of mathematical investigations (unlike numbers, triangles... ) Foundational crisis of mathematics (early 1900s) formal development of the logical systems underlying mathematics In Hilbert s Proof theory: proofs are mathematical objects. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 2 / 51
3 Hilbert calculus Mathematical investigation of proofs formal definition of proof Hilbert calculus fulfils this role. A Hilbert calculus for propositional classical logic. Axiom schemata: Ax 1: A (B A) Ax 2: (A (B C)) ((A B) (A C)) Ax 3: ( A B) (( A B) A) and the rule of modus ponens: A A B B Read A B as (A B) (B A). More axioms: Ax 4: A B ( A B) Ax 5: A B (A B) Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 3 / 51
4 Derivation of A A Definition A formal proof (derivation) of B is the finite sequence C 1, C 2,..., C n B of formulae where each element C j is an axiom instance or follows from two earlier elements by modus ponens. 1 ((A ((A A) A)) ((A (A A)) (A A))) Ax 2 2 (A ((A A) A)) Ax 1 3 ((A (A A)) (A A)) MP: 1 and 2 4 (A (A A)) Ax 1 5 A A MP: 3 and 4 Not easy to find! Proof has no clear structure (wrt A A) Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 4 / 51
5 Natural deduction and the sequent calculus Gentzen: proving consistency of arithmetic in weak extensions of finitistic reasoning. Hilbert calculus not convenient for studying the proofs (lack of structure). Gentzen introduces Natural deduction which formalises the way mathematicians reason. Gentzen introduced a proof-formalism with even more structure: the sequent calculus. Sequent calculus built from sequents X Y where X, Y are lists/sets/multisets of formulae Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 5 / 51
6 Sequent calculus sequent: sequent calculus rule: (S 0, S 1,..., S k are sequents) antecedent { }} { A 1, A 2,..., A m }{{} turnstile k 0 premises { }} { S 1... S k }{{} S conclusion succedent { }} { B 1, B 2,..., B n Typically a rule for introducing each connective in the antecedent and succedent. A 0-premise rule is called an initial sequent Definition (derivation) A derivation in the sequent calculus is an initial sequent or a rule applied to derivations of the premise(s). Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 6 / 51
7 The sequent calculus SCp for classical logic Cp init l p, X Y, p, X Y X Y, A A, X Y l A, B, X Y A B, X Y l A, X Y B, X Y A B, X Y l X Y, A B, X Y A B, X Y l A, X Y X Y, A r X Y, A X Y, B r X Y, A B X Y, A, B X Y, A B r A, X Y, B X Y, A B r Here X, Y are sets of formulae (possibly empty) There is a rule introducing each connective in the antecedent, succedent Aside: this calculus differs from Gentzen s calculus Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 7 / 51
8 Soundness and completeness of SCp for Cp Need to prove that SCp is actually a sequent calculus for Cp. Theorem For every formula A we have: A is derivable in SCp A Cp. ( ) direction is soundness. ( ) direction is completeness. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 8 / 51
9 Proof of completeness Need to show: A Cp A derivable in SCp. First show that A, X Y, A is derivable (induction on size of A). Show that every axiom of Cp is derivable (easy, below) and modus ponens can be simulated in SCp (not clear) B, A C, B r, B, A C B, A C, A B C, B, A C A, A (B C) C, A B, A, A (B C) C A, A B, (A (B C)) C A B, (A (B C)) (A C) (A (B C)) (A B) (A C) (A (B C)) ((A B) (A C)) Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 9 / 51
10 How to simulate modus ponens Gentzen s solution: to simulate modus ponens (below left) first add a new rule (below right) to SCp: A A B B X Y, A A, X Y cut X Y The following instance of the cut-rule illustrates the simulation of modus ponens. A A B B So: A Cp A derivable in SCp + cut! A A B B A B, A B A B cut Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 10 / 51
11 Proof of soundness Need to show: A derivable in SCp + cut A SCp. We need to interpret SCp + cut derivations in Cp. For sequent S define translation τ(s) A 1, A 2,..., A m B 1, B 2,..., B n A 1 A 2... A m B 1 B 2... B n Comma on the left is conjunction, comma on the right is disjunction. Translations of the intial sequents are theorems of Cp p X Y p X Y Show for each remaining rule ρ: if the translation of every premise is a theorem of Cp then so is the translation of the conclusion. For A, X B X A B need to show: A X B X (A B) Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 11 / 51
12 The cut-rule is undesirable in SCp + cut We have shown Theorem For every formula A we have: A is derivable in SCp + cut A Cp. The subformula property states that every formua in a premise appears as a subformula of the conclusion. If all the rules of the calculus satisfy this property, the calculus is analytic Analyticity is crucial to using the calculus (for consistency, decidability... ) SCp + cut is not analytic because: X Y, A A, X Y cut X Y We want to show: A is derivable in SCp A Cp Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 12 / 51
13 Gentzen s Hauptsatz (main theorem): cut-elimination Theorem Suppose that δ is a derivation of X Y in SCp + cut. Then there is a transformation to eliminate instances of the cut-rule from δ to obtain a derivation δ of X Y in SCp. Since A is derivable in SCp + cut A Cp: Theorem For every formula A we have: A is derivable in SCp if and only if A Cp. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 13 / 51
14 Applications: Consistency of classical logic Consistency of classical logic is the statement that A A Cp. Theorem Classical logic is consistent. Proof by contradiction. Suppose that A A Cp. Then A A is derivable in SCp (completeness). Let us try to derive it (read upwards from A A): A A A A A So A and A are derivable. Thus must be derivable in SCp + cut (use cut) and hence in SCp (by cut-elimination). This is impossible (why?) QED. Theorem Decidability of Cp. Given a formula A, do backward proof search in SCp on A. Since termination is guaranteed, we can decide if A is a theorem or not. QED. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 14 / 51
15 Looking beyond the sequent calculus Aside from proofs of consistency, proof-theoretic methods enable us to extract other meta-logical results (decidability and complexity bounds, interpolation) Many more logics of interest than just first-order classical and intuitionistic logic How to give a proof-theory to these logics? Want analytic calculi with modularity In a modular calculus we can add rules corresponding to (suitable) axiomatic extensions and preserve analyticity. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 15 / 51
16 Some nonclassical logics Consider a sequent X Y built from lists X, Y (rather than sets or multisets) then A, A, X Y and A, X Y are no longer equivalent (without contraction). Also A, B, X Y and B, A, X Y are not equivalent (without exchange). Even more generally, (A, B), X Y and A, (B, X) Y are not equivalent (without associativity). The logics obtained by removing these properties are called substructural logics. An intermediate logic L is a set of formulae closed under modus ponens such that intuitionistic logic Ip L Cp. Modal logics extend classical language with modalities and. The modalities were traditionally used to qualify statements like it is possible that it will rain today". Tense logics include the temporal modalities and. Closed under modus ponens and necessitation rule (A/ A). Sequent calculus inadequate for treating these logics (eg. no analytic sequent calculus for modal logic S5 despite analytic sequent calculus for S4) Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 16 / 51
17 Display Calculus Introduced as Display Logic (Belnap, 1982). Extends sequent calculus by introducing new structural connectives that interpret the logical connectives (enrich language) A structure is built from structural connectives and formulae. A display sequent: X Y for structures X and Y Display property. A substructure in X[U] Y equi-derivable (displayable) as U W or W U for some W. Key result. Belnap s general cut-elimination theorem applies when the rules of the calculus satisfy C1 C8 (display conditions) Display calculi have been presented for substructural logics, modal and poly-modal logics, tense logic, bunched logics, bi-intuitionistic logic... Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 17 / 51
18 Display calculi generalise the sequent calculus Here is the sequent calculus SCp once more: p, X Y, p init, X Y l X Y, A A, X Y l A, B, X Y A B, X Y l A, X Y B, X Y A B, X Y l X Y, A B, X Y A B, X Y l A, X Y X Y, A r X Y, A X Y, B r X Y, A B X Y, A, B X Y, A B r A, X Y, B X Y, A B r Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 18 / 51
19 Display calculi generalise the sequent calculus Let s add a new structural connective for negation. p, X Y, p init, X Y l A, X Y A, X Y l A, B, X Y A B, X Y l A, X Y B, X Y A B, X Y l X Y, A B, X Y A B, X Y l X Y, A X Y, A r X Y, A X Y, B r X Y, A B X Y, A, B X Y, A B r A, X Y, B X Y, A B r Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 19 / 51
20 Add the display rules The addition of the following rules permit the display property: Definition (display property) The calculus has the display property if for any sequent X Y containing a substructure U, there is a sequent U W or W U for some W such that X Y U W We say that U is displayed in the lower sequent. or X Y W U X, Y Z X Z, Y X Y, Z Y, X Z X Y X Y X, Y Z Y X, Z X Y Y X X Y X Y X Y, Z X, Z Y X Y Y X X Y X Y Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 20 / 51
21 Using the display rules Examples: (A, B) (C, D) (C, D) A, B A, (C, D) B B ( A, (C, D)) B is displayed (A, B) (C, D) C, D (A, B) D C, (A, B) D is displayed Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 21 / 51
22 Specify the properties of the structural connectives We want weakening, contraction, exchange, associativity. Here I is a structural constant for the empty list. X Z I, X Z X I X I X, Y Z Y, X Z Z X, X Z X X Z X I, Z X Z Y, X Z Z X, Y Z Y, X X 1, (X 2, X 3 ) Z (X 1, X 2 ), X 3 Z I Y I Y X Z X, Y Z X, X Z X Z Z X 1, (X 2, X 3 ) Z (X 1, X 2 ), X 3 Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 22 / 51
23 Display calculi generalise the sequent calculus The presence of the display rules permit the following rewriting of the rules: p p init I l A Y l A Y A, B Y l A B Y A Y B Y l A B Y X A r X A X A X B r X A B X A, B r X A B X A B Y l A B X, Y A, X B r X A B The formulae are called principal formulae. The X, Y are context variables. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 23 / 51
24 Sequent calculus to display calculus From a procedural point of view, we obtained the display calculus δcp for Cp from the sequent calculus by 1 Addition of a structural connective for negation 2 Addition of the display rules to yield the display property 3 Additional structural rules for exchange, weakening, contraction etc. 4 Rewriting the logical rules so the principal formulae in the conclusion are all of the antecedent or succedent Before we consider how to construct a display calculus utilising the properties of the logic, let us introduce Belnap s general cut-elimination theorem... Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 24 / 51
25 Belnap s general cut-elimination theorem Belnap showed that any display calculus satisfying the display conditions has cut-elimination. The display conditions C1 C8 are syntactic conditions on the rules of the calculus. Theorem A display calculus that satisfies the Display Conditions C2 C8 has cut-elimination. If C1 is satisfied, then the calculus has the subformula property. Proof follows Gentzen s cut-elimination, uses display property. Only C8 is non-trivial to verify. Verifying C1 C8 is trivial for rules built only from structures (structural rules) since C8 does not apply! X Z I, X Z X I X I X Z X I, Z X Z Y, X Z I Y I Y X Z X, Y Z Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 25 / 51
26 Display conditions Some sample rules: X A B Y ( l) A B X, Y A, X B ( r) X A B A B X A X (C1) Each schematic formula variable occurring in a premise of a rule ρ is a sub-formula of some schematic formula variable in the conclusion of ρ. (C2) A parameter is an occurrence of a schematic structure variable in the rule schema. Occurrences of the identical structure variable are said to be congruent to one another (really a definition) (C3) Each parameter is congruent to at most one structure variable in the conclusion. Ie. no two structure variables in the conclusion are congruent to each other. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 26 / 51
27 Display conditions Some sample rules: X A B Y ( l) A B X, Y A, X B ( r) X A B X Y X, X Y (C1) Each schematic formula variable occurring in a premise of a rule ρ is a sub-formula of some schematic formula variable in the conclusion of ρ. (C2) A parameter is an occurrence of a schematic structure variable in the rule schema. Occurrences of the identical structure variable are said to be congruent to one another (really a definition) (C3) Each parameter is congruent to at most one structure variable in the conclusion. Ie. no two structure variables in the conclusion are congruent to each other. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 27 / 51
28 Display conditions Some sample rules: X A B Y ( l) A B X, Y A, X B ( r) X A B X, Y Z X Z, Y (C4) Congruent parameters are all either a-part or s-part structures. (C5) A schematic formula variable in the conclusion of an inference rule ρ is either the entire antecedent or the entire succedent. This formula is called a principal formula of ρ. C6/7) Each inference rule is closed under simultaneous substitution of arbitrary structures for congruent parameters. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 28 / 51
29 Display conditions Some sample rules: X A B Y ( l) A B X, Y A, X B ( r) X A B A, B, X Y A B, X Y (C4) Congruent parameters are all either a-part or s-part structures. (C5) A schematic formula variable in the conclusion of an inference rule ρ is either the entire antecedent or the entire succedent. This formula is called a principal formula of ρ. C6/7) Each inference rule is closed under simultaneous substitution of arbitrary structures for congruent parameters. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 29 / 51
30 Display conditions Some sample rules: X A B Y ( l) A B X, Y A, X B ( r) X A B X, Y Z Y X, Z (C8) If there are inference rules ρ and σ with respective conclusions X A and A Y with formula A principal in both inferences (in the sense of C5) and if cut is applied to yield X Y, then X Y is identical to either X A or A Y ; or it is possible to pass from the premises of ρ and σ to X Y by means of inferences falling under cut where the cut-formula is always a proper sub-formula of A. A, X B X A B X ( r) A B Y ( l) A B X, Y cut X X, Y X A A, X B B Y cut A, X Y cut X, X Y dr X X, Y Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 30 / 51
31 Another look at constructing display calculi Some questions that arise when constructing a display calculus include: For which logics can we give a display calculus? How do we know which structural connectives to add? How to choose the display rules to ensure display property? Extending the display calculus via structural rules is convenient because the conditions for cut-elimination are easy to check (because C8 is not applicable) Suppose we have a display calculus for the logic L. For which extensions of L can we obtain structural rule extensions? Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 31 / 51
32 Bi-Lambek logic Obtain from the sequent calculus SCp for classical logic by removing assumptions (on the structural connective comma) of commutativity, contraction and weakening in a sequent A 1,..., A n B 1,..., B m Or define algebraically. A structure A = A,,,,,,, 1,, >, <,,, 0, is a Bi-FL algebra (short for Bi-Lambek algebra) if: 1. A,,,,, is a lattice with least element = > = < and greatest element = =. 2. (a) A,, 1 is a groupoid with identity 1 A (b) A,, 0 is a groupoid with co-identity 0 A. 3. (a) z (x y) w = (z x w) (z y w) for every x, y, z A (b) z (x y) w = (z x w) (z y w) for every x, y, z, w A 4. (a) x y z iff x z y iff y x z, for every x, y, z A (b) z x y iff x > z y iff z < y x, for every x, y, z A. The residuation properties (in red) crucial for constructing the display calculus. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 32 / 51
33 Residuated pairs for Bi-Lambek logic Recall the residuation properties. For every x, y, z A: x y z x z y y x z z x y x > z y z < y x Assign the following structural connectives to the logical connectives:, {}}{{}}{{}}{ x y z x z y y x z z x }{{} y x }{{} > z y z}{{} < y x, > < This gives us the following rewrite rules. A, B Y l A B Y A < B Y A < B Y < l < X A, B X A B X A < B X A B r r X Φ X 0 Φ X 1 X > A > B X A > B Y > l X A > B X A B r Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 33 / 51
34 Adding the display rules, {}}{{}}{{}}{ x y z x z y y x z z x }{{} y x }{{} > z y z}{{} < y x, > < This gives us the following rewrite rules. A, B Y l A B Y A < B Y A < B Y < l < X A, B X A B X A < B X A B r r X Φ X 0 Φ X 1 X > A > B X > l A > B Y And the following display rules: X, Y Z X Z < Y Y X > Z X A > B X A B r Z X, Y X > Z Y Z < Y X Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 34 / 51
35 Computing the decoding rules A, B Y l A B Y A < B Y A < B Y < l X A, B X A B X A < B X A B r r X Φ X 0 Φ X 1 X A > B X A > B Y > l X A > B X A B Here are the missing decoding rules (Goré, 1998) X A Y B r X, Y A B r A X B Y l A B X, Y 0 Φ X A B Y < r X < Y A < B A X Y B > r X > Y A > B A X Y B l A B X < Y X A B Y l A B X > Y Φ 1 Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 35 / 51
36 Rewrite rules are invertible Constructing the decoding rules is systematic (but not obvious, reasoning not shown here) and enforces: Lemma Every rewrite rule is invertible. For example, consider the rewrite rule and decoding rule for > : A > B Y A > B Y > l A X Y B > r X > Y A > B Here is the derivation witnessing invertibiltiy of > l. A A B B > r A > B A > B A > B Y cut A > B Y Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 36 / 51
37 Constructing a display calculus: summary The residuation property tells us which connectives are interpreted as a structural connective in which position The residuation property then gives the display rules Add remaining introduction rules (decoding rules). axioms for weakening, contraction etc. are converted to structural rules. (to be shown) The construction is focussed on the logical connectives that are residuated. The other connectives in the language (lattice connectives) do not introduce new structural connectives. I X l X A B X l A B X A X B X l A B X X I r X X A X B r X A B X A B r X A B Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 37 / 51
38 Interpreting sequents Define the interpretation functions l and r from structures into Bi-Lambek formulae. l(a) = A l(i) = r(a) = A r(i) = l(φ) = 1 r(φ) = 0 l(x, Y ) = l(x) l(y ) r(x, Y ) = l(x) r(y ) l(x > Y ) = l(x) > l(y ) r(x > Y ) = r(x) r(y ) l(x < Y ) = l(x) < l(y ) r(x > Y ) = r(x) r(y ) A sequent X Y is interpreted as l(x) r(y ). Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 38 / 51
39 Adding structural rules Some structural rules are straightforward to determine. X Y X Y, Z X, Z Y Z, X Y X (Y, Z ), U X Y, (Z, U) X Y X, Z Y X Y, Y X Y (X, Y ), Z U X, (Y, Z ) U X Y, Z X Z, Y X, X Y X Y Structural rules for the additive unit 1 and the multiplicative structural connectives: I, X Y X Y X, I Y X Y, I X Y X I, Y Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 39 / 51
40 Structural rule extensions of display calculi: a general recipe Logic L base display calculus C suitable axiomatic extension L + {A 1,..., A n } C + ρ ρ m structural rule extension Generalises method for obtaining hypersequent structural rules from axioms (Agata, Nick, Kaz) The approach is language and logic independent; purely syntactic conditions on the base calculus Extends Kracht s theorem on primitive tense formulae. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 40 / 51
41 Obtaining a structural rule from a Hilbert axiom δbifl is a display calculus for Bi-Lambek logic satisfying C1 C8. Let us obtain the structural rule extension of δbifl for the logic BiFL + (p 0) ((p 0) 0). STEP 1. Start with the axiom (below left) and apply all possible invertible rules backwards (below right). stop here: l not invertible I (p 0) ((p 0) 0) I < ((p 0) > Φ) p > Φ drs, 0r I < ((p 0) > 0) p > 0 r I < ((p 0) > 0) p 0 drs I < (p 0) (p 0) > 0 r I < (p 0) (p 0) 0 drs I (p 0), ((p 0) 0) r I (p 0) ((p 0) 0) So it suffices to introduce a structural rule equivalent to I < ((p 0) > Φ) p > Φ. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 41 / 51
42 STEP 2. Apply Ackermann s Lemma. Lemma The following rules are pairwise equivalent S ρ 1 X A S A L ρ2 X L S A X δ 1 S L A δ2 L X where S is a set of sequents, L is a fresh schematic structure variable, and A is a tense formula. I < ((p 0) > Φ) p > Φ d.p. p 0 (I < (p > Φ)) > Φ lem L p 0 L (I < (p > Φ)) > Φ d.p. L p 0 p (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ lem L p 0 M p M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ Stop when there are no more formulae in the conclusion Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 42 / 51
43 STEP 3. Apply all possible invertible rules backwards. L p 0 M p M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ L p > Φ L p > 0 M p M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ The following rule is not a structural rule. L p > Φ M p ρ M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ By Belnap s general cut-elimination theorem, δkt + ρ has cut-elimination. However it does not have the subformula property. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 43 / 51
44 STEP 4. Apply all possible cuts (and verify termination) L p > Φ M p ρ M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ d.p. p L > Φ M p ρ M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ One direction is cut, the other direction is non-trivial. We conclude: M L > Φ M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ δbiflt + ρ is a calculus for BiFL + (p 0) ((p 0) 0) with cut-elimination and subformula property. ρ Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 44 / 51
45 Summary of the recipe (1) Invertible rules (2) Ackermann s lemma (3) invertible rules (4) all possible cuts Only certain axioms can be handled I Because we cannot decompose all connectives in the axiom (i) we can handle a subformula p q in negative position (Ackermann s lemma will take it to a positive position where is invertible). (ii) but not a subformula A q in negative position, where A contains an p q in negative position. II And even if we can, Step (4) cutting step should terminate in a structural rule. Eg. the following is problematic: p, p L > Φ M p, p ρ M (I < (L > Φ)) > Φ Nevertheless we can capture a large class of axioms. More invertible rules, more axioms! eg. hypersequent, display calculus for intermediate logics Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 45 / 51
46 Definition. Amenable calculus Let C be a display calculus satisfying C1 C8. l and r are functions from structures into formulae s.t. l(a) = r(a) = A. Also: (i) X l(x) and r(x) X are derivable. (ii) X Y derivable implies l(x) r(y ) is derivable. There is a structure constant I such that the following are admissible: I X Y X Il X I X Y There are associative and commutative binary logical connectives, in C such that (a) A X and B X implies (A, B) X (b) X A implies X (A, B) for any formula B. (a) X A and X B implies X (A, B) (b) A X implies (A, B) X for any formula B. Ir Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 46 / 51
47 Axioms to structural rules A proper structural rule satisfies Belnap s conditions for cut-elimination C1-C8. Theorem Let C be an amenable calculus for L and suppose that axiom A is acyclic. Then there is a proper structural rule extension for L + A. What about the other direction? Which extensions of L can be written as structural rule extensions of C? Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 47 / 51
48 Proper structural rules to axioms Definition An amenable calculus C is well-behaved if: (i) the calculus contains an antecedent structural connective and a succedent structural connective such that: l(x Y ) = l(x) l(y ) r(x Y ) = r(x) r(y ) Here and are the connectives in the definition of amenable calculus (not necessarily conjunction, disjunction). (ii) The following identity-like rules are admissible: X U I U I Y X U U Y (iii) In the sequent X U V (resp. U V Y ) it is the case that V is a s-part (a-part) structure. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 48 / 51
49 A characterisation of proper structural rules Theorem Let C is an amenable well-behaved calculus for the logic L, and let L be an axiomatic extension of L. Then there is a proper structural rule extension of C for L iff L is an extension of L by acyclic axioms. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 49 / 51
50 Summary I The display calculus generalises the sequent calculus by the addition of new structural connectives. Display rules yield the display property. The display property is used to prove Belnap s general cut-elimination theorem. Residuation property central to choosing structural connectives, display rules. the display calculus is one of several proof-frameworks proposed to address the (lack of) analytic sequent calculi for logics of interests. Some other frameworks include hypersequents, nested sequents, labelled sequents. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 50 / 51
51 Summary II In some frameworks such as the calculus of structures, we can operate inside formulae (deep inference). The display calculus (below right) seems to mimic some notion of deep inference. B (B B ) I B I B I B, B I (B, B ) Recent work used a display calculus as the starting point for an analytic calculus for Full intuitionistic linear logic (MILL extended with ). A (deep inference) nested sequent calculus is then constructed to obtain complexity, conservativity results (Clouston et al., 2013). Recall the display calculus is for a fully residuated logic. What if we want a fragment (FL, intuitionistic, modal logic) of the full Bi-FL, bi-intuitionistic, tense logic? Conservativity of Bi-L for L required. Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 51 / 51
52 N.D. Belnap. Display Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 11(4), , A. Ciabattoni, N. Galatos and K. Terui. From axioms to analytic rules in nonclassical logics. Proceedings of LICS 2008, pp , A. Ciabattoni and R. Ramanayake. Structural rule extensions of display calculi: a general recipe. Proceedings of WOLLIC R. Clouston, R. Goré, and A. Tiu Annotation-Free Sequent Calculi for Full Intuitionistic Linear Logic. Proceedings of CSL G. Gentzen. The collected papers of Gerhard Gentzen. Edited by M. E. Szabo. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. Amsterdam, R. Goré. Substructural Logics On Display. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 6(3): , R. Goré. Gaggles, Gentzen and Galois: how to display your favourite substructural logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 6(5): , M. Kracht. Power and weakness of the modal display calculus. In: Proof theory of modal logic, Kluwer C. Rauszer. A formalization of propositional calculus of H-B logic. Studia Logica, The slides can be found at < Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Display calculi in non-classical logics 51 / 51
Structural extensions of display calculi: a general recipe
Structural extensions of display calculi: a general recipe Agata Ciabattoni and Revantha Ramanayake Vienna University of Technology {agata,revantha}@logic.at Abstract. We present a systematic procedure
More informationFROM AXIOMS TO STRUCTURAL RULES, THEN ADD QUANTIFIERS.
FROM AXIOMS TO STRUCTURAL RULES, THEN ADD QUANTIFIERS. REVANTHA RAMANAYAKE We survey recent developments in the program of generating proof calculi for large classes of axiomatic extensions of a non-classical
More informationGeneral methods in proof theory for modal logic - Lecture 1
General methods in proof theory for modal logic - Lecture 1 Björn Lellmann and Revantha Ramanayake TU Wien Tutorial co-located with TABLEAUX 2017, FroCoS 2017 and ITP 2017 September 24, 2017. Brasilia.
More informationInducing syntactic cut-elimination for indexed nested sequents
Inducing syntactic cut-elimination for indexed nested sequents Revantha Ramanayake Technische Universität Wien (Austria) IJCAR 2016 June 28, 2016 Revantha Ramanayake (TU Wien) Inducing syntactic cut-elimination
More informationNon-classical Logics: Theory, Applications and Tools
Non-classical Logics: Theory, Applications and Tools Agata Ciabattoni Vienna University of Technology (TUV) Joint work with (TUV): M. Baaz, P. Baldi, B. Lellmann, R. Ramanayake,... N. Galatos (US), G.
More information(Algebraic) Proof Theory for Substructural Logics and Applications
(Algebraic) Proof Theory for Substructural Logics and Applications Agata Ciabattoni Vienna University of Technology agata@logic.at (Algebraic) Proof Theory for Substructural Logics and Applications p.1/59
More informationDynamic Epistemic Logic Displayed
1 / 43 Dynamic Epistemic Logic Displayed Giuseppe Greco & Alexander Kurz & Alessandra Palmigiano April 19, 2013 ALCOP 2 / 43 1 Motivation Proof-theory meets coalgebra 2 From global- to local-rules calculi
More informationHypersequent Calculi for some Intermediate Logics with Bounded Kripke Models
Hypersequent Calculi for some Intermediate Logics with Bounded Kripke Models Agata Ciabattoni Mauro Ferrari Abstract In this paper we define cut-free hypersequent calculi for some intermediate logics semantically
More informationOn Urquhart s C Logic
On Urquhart s C Logic Agata Ciabattoni Dipartimento di Informatica Via Comelico, 39 20135 Milano, Italy ciabatto@dsiunimiit Abstract In this paper we investigate the basic many-valued logics introduced
More informationProof Theoretical Reasoning Lecture 3 Modal Logic S5 and Hypersequents
Proof Theoretical Reasoning Lecture 3 Modal Logic S5 and Hypersequents Revantha Ramanayake and Björn Lellmann TU Wien TRS Reasoning School 2015 Natal, Brasil Outline Modal Logic S5 Sequents for S5 Hypersequents
More informationAn Introduction to Proof Theory
An Introduction to Proof Theory Class 1: Foundations Agata Ciabattoni and Shawn Standefer anu lss december 2016 anu Our Aim To introduce proof theory, with a focus on its applications in philosophy, linguistics
More informationAN ALTERNATIVE NATURAL DEDUCTION FOR THE INTUITIONISTIC PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 45/1 (2016), pp 33 51 http://dxdoiorg/1018778/0138-068045103 Mirjana Ilić 1 AN ALTERNATIVE NATURAL DEDUCTION FOR THE INTUITIONISTIC PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC Abstract
More informationCut-elimination for Provability Logic GL
Cut-elimination for Provability Logic GL Rajeev Goré and Revantha Ramanayake Computer Sciences Laboratory The Australian National University { Rajeev.Gore, revantha }@rsise.anu.edu.au Abstract. In 1983,
More informationLabel-free Modular Systems for Classical and Intuitionistic Modal Logics
Label-free Modular Systems for Classical and Intuitionistic Modal Logics Sonia Marin ENS, Paris, France Lutz Straßburger Inria, Palaiseau, France Abstract In this paper we show for each of the modal axioms
More informationDeep Sequent Systems for Modal Logic
Deep Sequent Systems for Modal Logic Kai Brünnler abstract. We see a systematic set of cut-free axiomatisations for all the basic normal modal logics formed from the axioms t, b,4, 5. They employ a form
More informationEmbedding formalisms: hypersequents and two-level systems of rules
Embedding formalisms: hypersequents and two-level systems of rules Agata Ciabattoni 1 TU Wien (Vienna University of Technology) agata@logicat Francesco A Genco 1 TU Wien (Vienna University of Technology)
More informationValentini s cut-elimination for provability logic resolved
Valentini s cut-elimination for provability logic resolved Rajeev Goré and Revantha Ramanayake abstract. In 1983, Valentini presented a syntactic proof of cut-elimination for a sequent calculus GLS V for
More informationA CUT-FREE SIMPLE SEQUENT CALCULUS FOR MODAL LOGIC S5
THE REVIEW OF SYMBOLIC LOGIC Volume 1, Number 1, June 2008 3 A CUT-FREE SIMPLE SEQUENT CALCULUS FOR MODAL LOGIC S5 FRANCESCA POGGIOLESI University of Florence and University of Paris 1 Abstract In this
More informationGeneral methods in proof theory for modal logic - Lecture 1
General methods in proof theory for modal logic - Lecture 1 Björn Lellmann and Revantha Ramanayake TU Wien Tutorial co-located with TABLEAUX 2017, FroCoS 2017 and ITP 2017 September 24, 2017. Brasilia.
More informationLecture Notes on Cut Elimination
Lecture Notes on Cut Elimination 15-317: Constructive Logic Frank Pfenning Lecture 10 October 5, 2017 1 Introduction The entity rule of the sequent calculus exhibits one connection between the judgments
More informationPropositional Logic Language
Propositional Logic Language A logic consists of: an alphabet A, a language L, i.e., a set of formulas, and a binary relation = between a set of formulas and a formula. An alphabet A consists of a finite
More informationFrom Frame Properties to Hypersequent Rules in Modal Logics
From Frame Properties to Hypersequent Rules in Modal Logics Ori Lahav School of Computer Science Tel Aviv University Tel Aviv, Israel Email: orilahav@post.tau.ac.il Abstract We provide a general method
More informationAutomated Support for the Investigation of Paraconsistent and Other Logics
Automated Support for the Investigation of Paraconsistent and Other Logics Agata Ciabattoni 1, Ori Lahav 2, Lara Spendier 1, and Anna Zamansky 1 1 Vienna University of Technology 2 Tel Aviv University
More informationProof Theoretical Studies on Semilattice Relevant Logics
Proof Theoretical Studies on Semilattice Relevant Logics Ryo Kashima Department of Mathematical and Computing Sciences Tokyo Institute of Technology Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552, Japan. e-mail: kashima@is.titech.ac.jp
More informationLecture Notes on Sequent Calculus
Lecture Notes on Sequent Calculus 15-816: Modal Logic Frank Pfenning Lecture 8 February 9, 2010 1 Introduction In this lecture we present the sequent calculus and its theory. The sequent calculus was originally
More informationProving Completeness for Nested Sequent Calculi 1
Proving Completeness for Nested Sequent Calculi 1 Melvin Fitting abstract. Proving the completeness of classical propositional logic by using maximal consistent sets is perhaps the most common method there
More informationNatural Deduction for Propositional Logic
Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic Bow-Yaw Wang Institute of Information Science Academia Sinica, Taiwan September 10, 2018 Bow-Yaw Wang (Academia Sinica) Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic
More informationPrefixed Tableaus and Nested Sequents
Prefixed Tableaus and Nested Sequents Melvin Fitting Dept. Mathematics and Computer Science Lehman College (CUNY), 250 Bedford Park Boulevard West Bronx, NY 10468-1589 e-mail: melvin.fitting@lehman.cuny.edu
More informationCanonical Calculi: Invertibility, Axiom expansion and (Non)-determinism
Canonical Calculi: Invertibility, Axiom expansion and (Non)-determinism A. Avron 1, A. Ciabattoni 2, and A. Zamansky 1 1 Tel-Aviv University 2 Vienna University of Technology Abstract. We apply the semantic
More informationHypersequent and Labelled Calculi for Intermediate Logics
Hypersequent and Labelled Calculi for Intermediate Logics Agata Ciabattoni 1, Paolo Maffezioli 2, and Lara Spendier 1 1 Vienna University of Technology 2 University of Groningen Abstract. Hypersequent
More informationMarie Duží
Marie Duží marie.duzi@vsb.cz 1 Formal systems, Proof calculi A proof calculus (of a theory) is given by: 1. a language 2. a set of axioms 3. a set of deduction rules ad 1. The definition of a language
More informationA Schütte-Tait style cut-elimination proof for first-order Gödel logic
A Schütte-Tait style cut-elimination proof for first-order Gödel logic Matthias Baaz and Agata Ciabattoni Technische Universität Wien, A-1040 Vienna, Austria {agata,baaz}@logic.at Abstract. We present
More informationLogic. Propositional Logic: Syntax
Logic Propositional Logic: Syntax Logic is a tool for formalizing reasoning. There are lots of different logics: probabilistic logic: for reasoning about probability temporal logic: for reasoning about
More informationApplied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw
Applied Logic Lecture 1 - Propositional logic Marcin Szczuka Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw Monographic lecture, Spring semester 2017/2018 Marcin Szczuka (MIMUW) Applied Logic 2018
More informationLecture Notes on Linear Logic
Lecture Notes on Linear Logic 15-816: Modal Logic Frank Pfenning Lecture 23 April 20, 2010 1 Introduction In this lecture we will introduce linear logic [?] in its judgmental formulation [?,?]. Linear
More informationUniform interpolation and sequent calculi in modal logic
Uniform interpolation and sequent calculi in modal logic Rosalie Iemhoff March 28, 2015 Abstract A method is presented that connects the existence of uniform interpolants to the existence of certain sequent
More informationLinear Nested Sequents, 2-Sequents and Hypersequents
Linear Nested Sequents, 2-Sequents and Hypersequents Björn Lellmann TU Wien TABLEAUX 2015 Wroc law, Sep 22, 2015 Sequent systems and modal logics Sequent calculi for modal logics are well-established and
More informationBidirectional Decision Procedures for the Intuitionistic Propositional Modal Logic IS4
Bidirectional ecision Procedures for the Intuitionistic Propositional Modal Logic IS4 Samuli Heilala and Brigitte Pientka School of Computer Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada {sheila1,bpientka}@cs.mcgill.ca
More informationCut-elimination and Proof Search for Bi-Intuitionistic Tense Logic
Cut-elimination and Proof Search for Bi-Intuitionistic Tense Logic Rajeev Goré, Linda Postniece and Alwen Tiu Logic and Computation Group, School of Computer Science The Australian National University
More informationA Deep Inference System for the Modal Logic S5
A Deep Inference System for the Modal Logic S5 Phiniki Stouppa March 1, 2006 Abstract We present a cut-admissible system for the modal logic S5 in a formalism that makes explicit and intensive use of deep
More informationPřednáška 12. Důkazové kalkuly Kalkul Hilbertova typu. 11/29/2006 Hilbertův kalkul 1
Přednáška 12 Důkazové kalkuly Kalkul Hilbertova typu 11/29/2006 Hilbertův kalkul 1 Formal systems, Proof calculi A proof calculus (of a theory) is given by: A. a language B. a set of axioms C. a set of
More informationCONTRACTION CONTRACTED
Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 43:3/4 (2014), pp. 139 153 Andrzej Indrzejczak CONTRACTION CONTRACTED Abstract This short article is mainly of methodological character. We are concerned with the
More informationStructuring Logic with Sequent Calculus
Structuring Logic with Sequent Calculus Alexis Saurin ENS Paris & École Polytechnique & CMI Seminar at IIT Delhi 17th September 2004 Outline of the talk Proofs via Natural Deduction LK Sequent Calculus
More informationPropositions and Proofs
Chapter 2 Propositions and Proofs The goal of this chapter is to develop the two principal notions of logic, namely propositions and proofs There is no universal agreement about the proper foundations
More informationEvaluation Driven Proof-Search in Natural Deduction Calculi for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic
Evaluation Driven Proof-Search in Natural Deduction Calculi for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic Mauro Ferrari 1, Camillo Fiorentini 2 1 DiSTA, Univ. degli Studi dell Insubria, Varese, Italy 2 DI, Univ.
More informationLogic for Computer Science - Week 4 Natural Deduction
Logic for Computer Science - Week 4 Natural Deduction 1 Introduction In the previous lecture we have discussed some important notions about the semantics of propositional logic. 1. the truth value of a
More informationCHAPTER 10. Gentzen Style Proof Systems for Classical Logic
CHAPTER 10 Gentzen Style Proof Systems for Classical Logic Hilbert style systems are easy to define and admit a simple proof of the Completeness Theorem but they are difficult to use. By humans, not mentioning
More information5-valued Non-deterministic Semantics for The Basic Paraconsistent Logic mci
5-valued Non-deterministic Semantics for The Basic Paraconsistent Logic mci Arnon Avron School of Computer Science, Tel-Aviv University http://www.math.tau.ac.il/ aa/ March 7, 2008 Abstract One of the
More informationComputational Logic. Davide Martinenghi. Spring Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. Computational Logic Davide Martinenghi (1/30)
Computational Logic Davide Martinenghi Free University of Bozen-Bolzano Spring 2010 Computational Logic Davide Martinenghi (1/30) Propositional Logic - sequent calculus To overcome the problems of natural
More informationPropositional Logic: Syntax
4 Propositional Logic: Syntax Reading: Metalogic Part II, 22-26 Contents 4.1 The System PS: Syntax....................... 49 4.1.1 Axioms and Rules of Inference................ 49 4.1.2 Definitions.................................
More information3 Propositional Logic
3 Propositional Logic 3.1 Syntax 3.2 Semantics 3.3 Equivalence and Normal Forms 3.4 Proof Procedures 3.5 Properties Propositional Logic (25th October 2007) 1 3.1 Syntax Definition 3.0 An alphabet Σ consists
More informationSubstructural Logics and Residuated Lattices an Introduction
Hiroakira Ono Substructural Logics and Residuated Lattices an Introduction Abstract. This is an introductory survey of substructural logics and of residuated lattices which are algebraic structures for
More informationRelational semantics for a fragment of linear logic
Relational semantics for a fragment of linear logic Dion Coumans March 4, 2011 Abstract Relational semantics, given by Kripke frames, play an essential role in the study of modal and intuitionistic logic.
More informationCITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs
CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs Unit coordinator: Rachel Cardell-Oliver August 13, 2017 Highlights 1 Arguments vs Proofs. 2 Proof strategies 3 Famous proofs Reading Chapter 1: What is a proof? Mathematics
More informationInterpolation via translations
Interpolation via translations Walter Carnielli 2,3 João Rasga 1,3 Cristina Sernadas 1,3 1 DM, IST, TU Lisbon, Portugal 2 CLE and IFCH, UNICAMP, Brazil 3 SQIG - Instituto de Telecomunicações, Portugal
More informationUniform Schemata for Proof Rules
Uniform Schemata for Proof Rules Ulrich Berger and Tie Hou Department of omputer Science, Swansea University, UK {u.berger,cshou}@swansea.ac.uk Abstract. Motivated by the desire to facilitate the implementation
More informationProof-Theoretic Methods in Nonclassical Logic an Introduction
Proof-Theoretic Methods in Nonclassical Logic an Introduction Hiroakira Ono JAIST, Tatsunokuchi, Ishikawa, 923-1292, Japan ono@jaist.ac.jp 1 Introduction This is an introduction to proof theory of nonclassical
More informationBounded Lukasiewicz Logics
Bounded Lukasiewicz Logics Agata Ciabattoni 1 and George Metcalfe 2 1 Institut für Algebra und Computermathematik, Technische Universität Wien Wiedner Haupstrasse 8-10/118, A-1040 Wien, Austria agata@logic.at
More informationPropositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents
Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents Kyle Brooks April 18, 2012 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Formal Logic Systems 1 2.1 Consequence Relations......................... 2 3 Propositional Logic
More informationSIMPLE DECISION PROCEDURE FOR S5 IN STANDARD CUT-FREE SEQUENT CALCULUS
Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 45/2 (2016), pp. 125 140 http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/0138-0680.45.2.05 Andrzej Indrzejczak SIMPLE DECISION PROCEDURE FOR S5 IN STANDARD CUT-FREE SEQUENT CALCULUS
More informationcse371/mat371 LOGIC Professor Anita Wasilewska Fall 2018
cse371/mat371 LOGIC Professor Anita Wasilewska Fall 2018 Chapter 7 Introduction to Intuitionistic and Modal Logics CHAPTER 7 SLIDES Slides Set 1 Chapter 7 Introduction to Intuitionistic and Modal Logics
More informationNonclassical logics (Nichtklassische Logiken)
Nonclassical logics (Nichtklassische Logiken) VU 185.249 (lecture + exercises) http://www.logic.at/lvas/ncl/ Chris Fermüller Technische Universität Wien www.logic.at/people/chrisf/ chrisf@logic.at Winter
More informationExpanding the realm of systematic proof theory
Expanding the realm of systematic proof theory Agata Ciabattoni 1, Lutz Straßburger 2, and Kazushige Terui 3 1 Technische Universtät Wien, Austria 2 INRIA Saclay Île-de-France, France 3 RIMS, Kyoto University,
More informationCut-elimination and Proof-search for Bi- Intuitionistic Logic Using Nested Sequents
Cut-elimination and Proof-search for Bi- Intuitionistic Logic Using Nested Sequents Rajeev Goré, Linda Postniece, Alwen Tiu abstract. We propose a new sequent calculus for bi-intuitionistic logic which
More informationModal and temporal logic
Modal and temporal logic N. Bezhanishvili I. Hodkinson C. Kupke Imperial College London 1 / 83 Overview Part II 1 Soundness and completeness. Canonical models. 3 lectures. 2 Finite model property. Filtrations.
More informationHow and when axioms can be transformed into good structural rules
How and when axioms can be transformed into good structural rules Kazushige Terui National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo Laboratoire d Informatique de Paris Nord (Joint work with Agata Ciabattoni and
More informationThe Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic
The Importance of Being Formal Martin Henz February 5, 2014 Propositional Logic 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets, and therefore, propositions are limited to stating facts on sets
More informationOn sequent calculi vs natural deductions in logic and computer science
On sequent calculi vs natural deductions in logic and computer science L. Gordeev Uni-Tübingen, Uni-Ghent, PUC-Rio PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, October 13, 2015 1. Sequent calculus (SC): Basics -1- 1. Sequent
More informationBoolean bunched logic: its semantics and completeness
Boolean bunched logic: its semantics and completeness James Brotherston Programming Principles, Logic and Verification Group Dept. of Computer Science University College London, UK J.Brotherston@ucl.ac.uk
More information185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic
185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic www.volny.cz/behounek/logic/teaching/mathlog13 Libor Běhounek, behounek@cs.cas.cz Lecture #1, October 15, 2013 Organizational matters Study materials will be posted
More informationChapter 3: Propositional Calculus: Deductive Systems. September 19, 2008
Chapter 3: Propositional Calculus: Deductive Systems September 19, 2008 Outline 1 3.1 Deductive (Proof) System 2 3.2 Gentzen System G 3 3.3 Hilbert System H 4 3.4 Soundness and Completeness; Consistency
More informationLinear Nested Sequents, 2-Sequents and Hypersequents
Linear Nested Sequents, 2-Sequents and Hypersequents Björn Lellmann Department of Computer Languages, TU Wien, Vienna, Austria Abstract. We introduce the framework of linear nested sequent calculi by restricting
More informationPropositional Logic. Fall () Propositional Logic Fall / 30
Propositional Logic Fall 2013 () Propositional Logic Fall 2013 1 / 30 1 Introduction Learning Outcomes for this Presentation 2 Definitions Statements Logical connectives Interpretations, contexts,... Logically
More informationCHAPTER 11. Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic
CHAPTER 11 Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic Intuitionistic logic has developed as a result of certain philosophical views on the foundation of mathematics, known as intuitionism. Intuitionism was originated
More informationCyclic Proofs for Linear Temporal Logic
Cyclic Proofs for Linear Temporal Logic Ioannis Kokkinis Thomas Studer Abstract Annotated sequents provide an elegant approach for the design of deductive systems for temporal logics. Their proof theory,
More informationAn Introduction to Proof Theory
CHAPTER I An Introduction to Proof Theory Samuel R. Buss Departments of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of California, San Diego La Jolla, California 92093-0112, USA Contents 1. Proof theory
More informationFirst-Order Intuitionistic Logic with Decidable Propositional Atoms
First-Order Intuitionistic Logic with Decidable Propositional Atoms Alexander Sakharov alex@sakharov.net http://alex.sakharov.net Abstract First-order intuitionistic logic extended with the assumption
More informationPropositional Logic: Syntax
Logic Logic is a tool for formalizing reasoning. There are lots of different logics: probabilistic logic: for reasoning about probability temporal logic: for reasoning about time (and programs) epistemic
More informationIntroduction to Intuitionistic Logic
Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic August 31, 2016 We deal exclusively with propositional intuitionistic logic. The language is defined as follows. φ := p φ ψ φ ψ φ ψ φ := φ and φ ψ := (φ ψ) (ψ φ). A
More informationOverview of Logic and Computation: Notes
Overview of Logic and Computation: Notes John Slaney March 14, 2007 1 To begin at the beginning We study formal logic as a mathematical tool for reasoning and as a medium for knowledge representation The
More informationCraig Interpolation in Displayable Logics
Craig Interpolation in Displayable Logics James Brotherston 1 and Rajeev Goré 2 1 Dept. of Computing, Imperial College London J.Brotherston@imperial.ac.uk 2 School of Computer Science, ANU Canberra Rajeev.Gore@anu.edu.au
More informationNatural Deduction. Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson
Natural Deduction Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson Outline 1. An example 1. Validity by truth table 2. Validity by proof 2. What s a proof 1. Proof checker 3. Rules of
More informationOn the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs
On the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs Nikolai V. Krupski Department of Math. Logic and the Theory of Algorithms, Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics, Moscow State University, Moscow 119899,
More informationProof Theory and Proof Search of Bi-Intuitionistic and Tense Logic Linda Postniece
Proof Theory and Proof Search of Bi-Intuitionistic and Tense Logic Linda Postniece A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The Australian National University November 2010 c Linda
More informationProof Search in Nested Sequent Calculi
Proof Search in Nested Sequent Calculi Björn Lellmann 1 and Elaine Pimentel 2 1 Institute of Computer Languages, TU Wien, Austria 2 Departamento de Matemática, UFRN, Brazil Abstract. We propose a notion
More informationNotes on Inference and Deduction
Notes on Inference and Deduction Consider the following argument 1 Assumptions: If the races are fixed or the gambling houses are crooked, then the tourist trade will decline. If the tourist trade declines
More informationOn Sequent Calculi for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic
On Sequent Calculi for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic Vítězslav Švejdar Jan 29, 2005 The original publication is available at CMUC. Abstract The well-known Dyckoff s 1992 calculus/procedure for intuitionistic
More informationNested Sequent Calculi for Normal Conditional Logics
Nested Sequent Calculi for Normal Conditional Logics Régis Alenda 1 Nicola Olivetti 2 Gian Luca Pozzato 3 1 Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS, LSIS UMR 7296, 13397, Marseille, France. regis.alenda@univ-amu.fr
More informationcis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006
cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006 today s topics: propositional logic cis32-spring2006-sklar-lec18 1 Introduction Weak (search-based) problem-solving does not scale to real problems. To succeed, problem
More information02 Propositional Logic
SE 2F03 Fall 2005 02 Propositional Logic Instructor: W. M. Farmer Revised: 25 September 2005 1 What is Propositional Logic? Propositional logic is the study of the truth or falsehood of propositions or
More informationSyntactic Conditions for Invertibility in Sequent Calculi
Syntactic Conditions for Invertibility in Sequent Calculi Peter Chapman School of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, Scotland Email: pc@cs.st-and.ac.uk Abstract Formalised proofs of Cut admissibility
More informationPartially commutative linear logic: sequent calculus and phase semantics
Partially commutative linear logic: sequent calculus and phase semantics Philippe de Groote Projet Calligramme INRIA-Lorraine & CRIN CNRS 615 rue du Jardin Botanique - B.P. 101 F 54602 Villers-lès-Nancy
More informationLecture Notes on Kripke Semantics for Validity
Lecture Notes on Kripke Semantics for Validity 15-816: Modal Logic Frank Pfenning Lecture 16 March 23, 2010 1 Introduction In this lecture we continue the analysis of distributed computation through modal
More informationarxiv: v2 [cs.lo] 10 Aug 2015
Grafting Hypersequents onto Nested Sequents Roman Kuznets and Björn Lellmann Institut für Computersprachen, Technische Universität Wien arxiv:150200814v2 [cslo] 10 Aug 2015 Abstract Dedicated to the memory
More informationRecent Developments in and Around Coaglgebraic Logics
Recent Developments in and Around Coaglgebraic Logics D. Pattinson, Imperial College London (in collaboration with G. Calin, R. Myers, L. Schröder) Example: Logics in Knowledge Representation Knowledge
More informationdistinct models, still insists on a function always returning a particular value, given a particular list of arguments. In the case of nondeterministi
On Specialization of Derivations in Axiomatic Equality Theories A. Pliuskevicien_e, R. Pliuskevicius Institute of Mathematics and Informatics Akademijos 4, Vilnius 2600, LITHUANIA email: logica@sedcs.mii2.lt
More informationOn the Correspondence between Display Postulates and Deep Inference in Nested Sequent Calculi for Tense Logics
On the Correspondence between Display Postulates and Deep Inference in Nested Sequent Calculi for Tense Logics Rajeev Goré, Linda Postniece, and Alwen Tiu Logic and Computation Group College of Engineering
More informationA refined calculus for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic
A refined calculus for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic Mauro Ferrari 1, Camillo Fiorentini 2, Guido Fiorino 3 1 Dipartimento di Informatica e Comunicazione, Università degli Studi dell Insubria Via
More informationA Characterization of Displayable Logics Extending Update Logic
A Characterization of Displayable Logics Extending Update Logic Guillaume Aucher To cite this version: Guillaume Aucher. A Characterization of Displayable Logics Extending Update Logic. [Research Report]
More informationLecture Notes on Combinatory Modal Logic
Lecture Notes on Combinatory Modal Logic 15-816: Modal Logic Frank Pfenning Lecture 9 February 16, 2010 1 Introduction The connection between proofs and program so far has been through a proof term assignment
More information