scholarly journals The geometry of non-distributive logics

2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 1108-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Restall ◽  
Francesco Paoli
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Deduction System ◽  
Inductive Definition ◽  
Theoretical Criterion ◽  
Natural Deduction System

AbstractIn this paper we introduce a new natural deduction system for the logic of lattices, and a number of extensions of lattice logic with different negation connectives. We provide the class of natural deduction proofs with both a standard inductive definition and a global graph-theoretical criterion for correctness, and we show how normalisation in this system corresponds to cut elimination in the sequent calculus for lattice logic. This natural deduction system is inspired both by Shoesmith and Smiley's multiple conclusion systems for classical logic and Girard's proofnets for linear logic.

scholarly journals Normalization as a consequence of cut elimination

2009 ◽  
Vol 86 (100) ◽  
pp. 27-34
Author(s):  
Mirjana Borisavljevic
Keyword(s):  
Intuitionistic Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Deduction System ◽  
Normalization Theorem ◽  
Natural Deduction System

Pairs of systems, which consist of a system of sequents and a natural deduction system for some part of intuitionistic logic, are considered. For each of these pairs of systems the property that the normalization theorem is a consequence of the cut-elimination theorem is presented.

On categorical models of classical logic and the Geometry of Interaction

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 957-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
CARSTEN FÜHRMANN ◽  
DAVID PYM
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Disjoint Union ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Structural Theory ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Categorical Models ◽  
Boolean Lattices ◽  
Deep Exploration ◽  
Straightforward Proof

It is well known that weakening and contraction cause naive categorical models of the classical sequent calculus to collapse to Boolean lattices. In previous work, summarised briefly herein, we have provided a class of models calledclassical categoriesthat is sound and complete and avoids this collapse by interpreting cut reduction by a poset enrichment. Examples of classical categories include boolean lattices and the category of sets and relations, where both conjunction and disjunction are modelled by the set-theoretic product. In this article, which is self-contained, we present an improved axiomatisation of classical categories, together with a deep exploration of their structural theory. Observing that the collapse already happens in the absence of negation, we start with negation-free models calledDummett categories. Examples of these include, besides the classical categories mentioned above, the category of sets and relations, where both conjunction and disjunction are modelled by the disjoint union. We prove that Dummett categories are MIX, and that the partial order can be derived from hom-semilattices, which have a straightforward proof-theoretic definition. Moreover, we show that the Geometry-of-Interaction construction can be extended from multiplicative linear logic to classical logic by applying it to obtain a classical category from a Dummett category.Along the way, we gain detailed insights into the changes that proofs undergo during cut elimination in the presence of weakening and contraction.

On the unification of classical, intuitionistic and affine logics

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1177-1216
Author(s):  
CHUCK LIANG
Keyword(s):  
Intuitionistic Logic ◽  
Classical Logic ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Kripke Semantics ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Phase Semantics ◽  
Intuitionistic Logics

This article presents a unified logic that combines classical logic, intuitionistic logic and affine linear logic (restricting contraction but not weakening). We show that this unification can be achieved semantically, syntactically and in the computational interpretation of proofs. It extends our previous work in combining classical and intuitionistic logics. Compared to linear logic, classical fragments of proofs are better isolated from non-classical fragments. We define a phase semantics for this logic that naturally extends the Kripke semantics of intuitionistic logic. We present a sequent calculus with novel structural rules, which entail a more elaborate procedure for cut elimination. Computationally, this system allows affine-linear interpretations of proofs to be combined with classical interpretations, such as the λμ calculus. We show how cut elimination must respect the boundaries between classical and non-classical modes of proof that correspond to delimited control effects.

scholarly journals An Alternative Natural Deduction for the Intuitionistic Propositional Logic

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjana Ilić
Keyword(s):  
Intuitionistic Logic ◽  
Propositional Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Intuitionistic Propositional Logic ◽  
Deduction System ◽  
Natural Deduction System

A natural deduction system NI, for the full propositional intuitionistic logic, is proposed. The operational rules of NI are obtained by the translation from Gentzen’s calculus LJ and the normalization is proved, via translations from sequent calculus derivations to natural deduction derivations and back.

PEIRCE’S CALCULI FOR CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 509-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
MINGHUI MA ◽  
AHTI-VEIKKO PIETARINEN
Keyword(s):  
Propositional Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Theoretic Analysis ◽  
Classical Propositional Logic ◽  
Deduction System ◽  
Natural Deduction System ◽  
Logical Algebra ◽  
Graphical System ◽  
Logical Calculi

AbstractThis article investigates Charles Peirce’s development of logical calculi for classical propositional logic in 1880–1896. Peirce’s 1880 work on the algebra of logic resulted in a successful calculus for Boolean algebra. This calculus, denoted byPC, is here presented as a sequent calculus and not as a natural deduction system. It is shown that Peirce’s aim was to presentPCas a sequent calculus. The law of distributivity, which Peirce states in 1880, is proved using Peirce’s Rule, which is a residuation, inPC. The transitional systems of the algebra of the copula that Peirce develops since 1880 paved the way to the 1896 graphical system of the alpha graphs. It is shown how the rules of the alpha system reinterpret Boolean algebras, answering Peirce’s statement that logical graphs supply a new system of fundamental assumptions to logical algebra. A proof-theoretic analysis is given for the connection betweenPCand the alpha system.

scholarly journals A Precise Definition of an Inference (by the Example of Natural Deduction Systems for Logics $I_{\langle \alpha,\beta \rangle}$

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
В.О. Шангин
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Precise Definition ◽  
The Other ◽  
Deduction System ◽  
Introduction Rule ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Natural Deduction System ◽  
Alpha Beta ◽  
Definition Of

In the paper, we reconsider a precise definition of a natural deduction inference given by V. Smirnov. In refining the definition, we argue that all the other indirect rules of inference in a system can be considered as special cases of the implication introduction rule in a sense that if one of those rules can be applied then the implication introduction rule can be applied, either, but not vice versa. As an example, we use logics $I_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}, \alpha, \beta \in \{0, 1, 2, 3,\dots \omega\}$, such that $I_{\langle 0, 0\rangle}$is propositional classical logic, presented by V. Popov. He uses these logics, in particular, a Hilbert-style calculus $HI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}, \alpha, \beta \in \{0, 1, 2, 3,\dots \omega\}$, for each logic in question, in order to construct examples of effects of Glivenko theorem’s generalization. Here we, first, propose a subordinated natural deduction system $NI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}, \alpha, \beta \in \{0, 1, 2, 3,\dots \omega\}$, for each logic in question, with a precise definition of a $NI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}$-inference. Moreover, we, comparatively, analyze precise and traditional definitions. Second, we prove that, for each $\alpha, \beta \in \{0, 1, 2, 3,\dots \omega\}$, a Hilbert-style calculus $HI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}$and a natural deduction system $NI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}$are equipollent, that is, a formula $A$ is provable in $HI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}$iff $A$ is provable in $NI_{\langle\alpha, \beta\rangle}$. DOI: 10.21146/2074-1472-2017-23-1-83-104

scholarly journals On Polymorphic Sessions and Functions

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-55
Author(s):  
Bernardo Toninho ◽  
Nobuko Yoshida
Keyword(s):  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Linear Formulation ◽  
Session Types ◽  
Logical Foundation ◽  
Π Calculus ◽  
Soundness And Completeness ◽  
System F ◽  
Algebraic Representations

This work exploits the logical foundation of session types to determine what kind of type discipline for the Λ-calculus can exactly capture, and is captured by, Λ-calculus behaviours. Leveraging the proof theoretic content of the soundness and completeness of sequent calculus and natural deduction presentations of linear logic, we develop the first mutually inverse and fully abstract processes-as-functions and functions-as-processes encodings between a polymorphic session π-calculus and a linear formulation of System F. We are then able to derive results of the session calculus from the theory of the Λ-calculus: (1) we obtain a characterisation of inductive and coinductive session types via their algebraic representations in System F; and (2) we extend our results to account for value and process passing, entailing strong normalisation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document