Proof Theory for First Order Łukasiewicz Logic

2007 ◽  
pp. 28-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Baaz ◽  
George Metcalfe
Keyword(s):  
Proof Theory ◽  
Łukasiewicz Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
Lukasiewicz Logic

scholarly journals Giles’s Game and the Proof Theory of Łukasiewicz Logic

Studia Logica ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian G. Fermüller ◽  
George Metcalfe
Keyword(s):  
Proof Theory ◽  
Łukasiewicz Logic ◽  
Lukasiewicz Logic

Compactness in first order Lukasiewicz logic

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 254-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. R. Tavana ◽  
M. Pourmahdian ◽  
F. Didehvar
Keyword(s):  
Łukasiewicz Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
Lukasiewicz Logic

scholarly journals Dynamic Łukasiewicz logic and its application to immune system

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Di Nola ◽  
Revaz Grigolia ◽  
Nunu Mitskevich ◽  
Gaetano Vitale
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Scalar Multiplication ◽  
Kripke Semantics ◽  
Łukasiewicz Logic ◽  
Lukasiewicz Logic ◽  
Regular Algebras

AbstractIt is introduced an immune dynamic n-valued Łukasiewicz logic $$ID{\L }_n$$ I D Ł n on the base of n-valued Łukasiewicz logic $${\L }_n$$ Ł n and corresponding to it immune dynamic $$MV_n$$ M V n -algebra ($$IDL_n$$ I D L n -algebra), $$1< n < \omega $$ 1 < n < ω , which are algebraic counterparts of the logic, that in turn represent two-sorted algebras $$(\mathcal {M}, \mathcal {R}, \Diamond )$$ ( M , R , ◊ ) that combine the varieties of $$MV_n$$ M V n -algebras $$\mathcal {M} = (M, \oplus , \odot , \sim , 0,1)$$ M = ( M , ⊕ , ⊙ , ∼ , 0 , 1 ) and regular algebras $$\mathcal {R} = (R,\cup , ;, ^*)$$ R = ( R , ∪ , ; , ∗ ) into a single finitely axiomatized variety resembling R-module with “scalar” multiplication $$\Diamond $$ ◊ . Kripke semantics is developed for immune dynamic Łukasiewicz logic $$ID{\L }_n$$ I D Ł n with application in immune system.

Uniqueness, definability and interpolation

1988 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 554-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosta Došen ◽  
Peter Schroeder-Heister
Keyword(s):  
Proof Theory ◽  
Interpolation Theorem ◽  
Order Logic ◽  
First Order Logic ◽  
General Notion ◽  
Structural Part ◽  
First Order ◽  
First Case ◽  
Additional Constant ◽  
Special Case

This paper is meant to be a comment on Beth's definability theorem. In it we shall make the following points.Implicit definability as mentioned in Beth's theorem for first-order logic is a special case of a more general notion of uniqueness. If α is a nonlogical constant, Tα a set of sentences, α* an additional constant of the same syntactical category as α and Tα, a copy of Tα with α* instead of α, then for implicit definability of α in Tα one has, in the case of predicate constants, to derive α(x1,…,xn) ↔ α*(x1,…,xn) from Tα ∪ Tα*, and similarly for constants of other syntactical categories. For uniqueness one considers sets of schemata Sα and derivability from instances of Sα ∪ Sα* in the language with both α and α*, thus allowing mixing of α and α* not only in logical axioms and rules, but also in nonlogical assumptions. In the first case, but not necessarily in the second one, explicit definability follows. It is crucial for Beth's theorem that mixing of α and α* is allowed only inside logic, not outside. This topic will be treated in §1.Let the structural part of logic be understood roughly in the sense of Gentzen-style proof theory, i.e. as comprising only those rules which do not specifically involve logical constants. If we restrict mixing of α and α* to the structural part of logic which we shall specify precisely, we obtain a different notion of implicit definability for which we can demonstrate a general definability theorem, where a is not confined to the syntactical categories of nonlogical expressions of first-order logic. This definability theorem is a consequence of an equally general interpolation theorem. This topic will be treated in §§2, 3, and 4.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document