Search

The problem of precise characterisation of traditional forms of reasoning applied in mathematics was independently investigated and successfully resolved by Jaśkowski and Gentzen in 1934. However, there are traces of earlier interests in this field exhibited by the members of the Lvov-Warsaw School. We focus on the results obtained by Jaśkowski and Leśniewski. Jaśkowski provided the first formal system of natural deduction in 1926. Leśniewski also demonstrated in some of his papers how to construct proofs in accordance with intuitively correct principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper provides a proof theoretic characterization of the Russellian theory of definite descriptions (RDD) as characterized by Kalish, Montague and Mar (KMM). To this effect three sequent calculi are introduced: LKID0, LKID1 and LKID2. LKID0 is an auxiliary system which is easily shown to be equivalent to KMM. The main research is devoted to LKID1 and LKID2. The former is simpler in the sense of having smaller number of rules and, after small change, satisfies cut elimination but fails to satisfy the subformula property. In LKID2 an additional analysis of different kinds of identities leads to proliferation of rules but yields the subformula property. This refined proof theoretic analysis leading to fully analytic calculus with constructive proof of cut elimination is the main contribution of the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We provide an application of a sequent calculus framework to the formalization of definite descriptions. It is a continuation of research undertaken in [20, 22]. In the present paper a so-called free description theory is examined in the context of different kinds of free logic, including systems applied in computer science and constructive mathematics for dealing with partial functions. It is shown that the same theory in different logics may be formalised by means of different rules and gives results of varying strength. For all presented calculi a constructive cut elimination is provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a sequel article to [10] where a hypersequent calculus (HC) for some temporal logics of linear frames including Kt4.3 and its extensions for dense and serial flow of time was investigated in detail. A distinctive feature of this approach is that hypersequents are noncommutative, i.e., they are finite lists of sequents in contrast to other hypersequent approaches using sets or multisets. Such a system in [10] was proved to be cut-free HC formalization of respective logics by means of semantical argument. In this article we present an equivalent variant of this calculus for which a constructive syntactical proof of cut elimination is provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present a proof-theoretical analysis of the theory of definite descriptions which emerges from Frege's approach and was formally developed by Kalish and Montague. This theory of definite descriptions is based on the assumption that all descriptions are treated as genuine terms. In particular, a special object is chosen as a designatum for all descriptions which fail to designate a unique object. Kalish and Montague provided a semantical treatment of such theory as well as complete axiomatic and natural deduction formalization. In the paper we provide a sequent calculus formalization of this logic and prove cut elimination theorem in the constructive manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In several applications of sequent calculi going beyond pure logic, an introduction of suitably defined rules seems to be more profitable than addition of extra axiomatic sequents. A program of formalization of mathematical theories via rules of special sort was developed successfully by Negri and von Plato. In this paper a general theorem on possible ways of transforming axiomatic sequents into rules in sequent calculi is proved. We discuss its possible applications and provide some case studies for illustration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tautology elimination rule was successfully applied in automated deduction and recently considered in the framework of sequent calculi where it is provably equivalent to cut rule. In this paper we focus on the advan-tages of proving admissibility of tautology elimination rule instead of cut for sequent calculi. It seems that one may find simpler proofs of admissibility for tautology elimination than for cut admissibility. Moreover, one may prove its admissibility for some calculi where constructive proofs of cut admissibility fail. As an illustration we present a cut-free sequent calculus for S5 based on tableau system of Fitting and prove admissibility of tautology elimination rule for it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypersequent calculi (HC) can formalize various non-classical logics. In [9] we presented a non-commutative variant of HC for the weakest temporal logic of linear frames Kt4.3 and some its extensions for dense and serial ow of time. The system was proved to be cut-free HC formalization of respective temporal logics by means of Schütte/Hintikka-style semantical argument using models built from saturated hypersequents. In this paper we present a variant of this calculus for Kt4.3 with a constructive syntactical proof of cut elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the paper a decision procedure for S5 is presented which uses a cut-free sequent calculus with additional rules allowing a reduction to normal modal forms. It utilizes the fact that in S5 every formula is equivalent to some 1-degree formula, i.e. a modally- at formula with modal functors having only boolean formulas in its scope. In contrast to many sequent calculi (SC) for S5 the presented system does not introduce any extra devices. Thus it is a standard version of SC but with some additional simple rewrite rules. The procedure combines the process of saturation of sequents with reduction of their elements to some normal modal form. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

S5 is one of the most important modal logic with nice syntactic, semantic and algebraic properties. In spite of that, a successful (i.e. cut-free) formalization of S5 on the ground of standard sequent calculus (SC) was problematic and led to the invention of numerous nonstandard, generalised forms of SC. One of the most interesting framework which was very often used for this aim is that of hypersequent calculi (HC). The paper is a survey of HC for S5 proposed by Pottinger, Avron, Restall, Poggiolesi, Lahav and Kurokawa. We are particularly interested in examining different methods which were used for proving the eliminability/admissibility of cut in these systems and present our own variant of a system which admits relatively simple proof of cut elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hybrid logics are extensions of standard modal logics, which significantly increase the expressive power of the latter. Since most of hybrid logics are known to be decidable, decision procedures for them is a widely investigated field of research. So far, several tableau calculi for hybrid logics have been presented in the literature. In this paper we in- troduce a sound, complete and terminating tableau calculus TH(@, E , D ,◇ -) for hybrid logics with the satisfaction operators, the universal modality, the difference modality and the inverse modality as well as the corresponding sequent calculus SH(@, E , D ,◇ -). They not only uniformly cover relatively wide range of various hybrid logics but they are also conceptually simple and enable effective search for a minimal model for a satisfiable formula. The main novelty is the exploitation of the unrestricted blocking mechanism introduced as an explicit, sound tableau rule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present a detailed proof of the admissibility of cut in sequent calculus for some congruent modal logics. The result was announced much earlier during the Trends in Logic Conference, Toruñ 2006 and the proof for monotonic modal logics was provided already in Indrzejczak [5]. Also some tableau and natural deduction formalizations presented in Indrzejczak [61 and Indrzejczak [7] were based on this result but the proof itself was not published so far. In this paper we are going to fill this gap. The delay was partly due to the fact that the author from time to time was trying to improve the result and extend it to some additional logics by testing other methods of proving cut elimination. Unfortunately all these attempts failed and cut elimination holds only for these logics which were proved to satisfy this property already in 2005. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]