Cut Elimination inside a Deep Inference System for Classical Predicate Logic

Deep inference is a natural generalisation of the one-sided sequent calculus where rules are allowed to apply deeply inside formulas, much like rewrite rules in term rewriting. This freedom in applying inference rules allows to express logical systems that are difficult or impossible to express in the cut-free sequent calculus and it also allows for a more fine-grained analysis of derivations than the sequent calculus. However, the same freedom also makes it harder to carry out this analysis, in particular it is harder to design cut elimination procedures. In this paper we see a cut elimination procedure for a deep inference system for classical predicate logic. As a consequence we derive Herbrand's Theorem, which we express as a factorisation of derivations.     

Algebraic Aspects of Cut Elimination

We will give here a purely algebraic proof of the cut elimination theorem for various sequent systems. Our basic idea is to introduce mathematical structures, called Gentzen structures, for a given sequent system without cut, and then to show the completeness of the sequent system without cut with respect to the class of algebras for the sequent system with cut, by using the quasi-completion of these Gentzen structures. It is shown that the quasi-completion is a generalization of the MacNeille completion. Moreover, the finite model property is obtained for many cases, by modifying our completeness proof. This is an algebraic presentation of the proof of the finite model property discussed by Lafont [12] and Okada-Terui [17].     

Dynamic Topological Completeness for

Dynamic topological logic (DTL) combines topological and temporalmodalities to express asymptotic properties of dynamic systemson topological spaces. A dynamic topological model is a tripleX ,f , V , where X is a topological space, f : X X a continuousfunction and V a truth valuation assigning subsets of X to propositionalvariables. Valid formulas are those that are true in every model,independently of X or f. A natural problem that arises is toidentify the logics obtained on familiar spaces, such as . It [9] it was shown that any satisfiable formulacould be satisfied in some for n large enough, but the question of how the logic varieswith n remained open. In this paper we prove that any fragment of DTL that is completefor locally finite Kripke frames is complete for . This includes DTL; it also includes some largerfragments, such as DTL₁, where "henceforth" may not appear inthe scope of a topological operator. We show that satisfiabilityof any formula of our language in a locally finite Kripke frameimplies satisfiability in by constructing continuous, open maps from the plane intoarbitrary locally finite Kripke frames, which give us a typeof bisimulation. We also show that the results cannot be extendedto arbitrary formulas of DTL by exhibiting a formula which isvalid in but not in arbitrarytopological spaces.     

Socratic Proofs and Paraconsistency: A Case Study

This paper develops a new proof method for two propositional paraconsistent logics: the propositional part of Batens' weak paraconsistent logic CLuN and Schütte's maximally paraconsistent logic Φ_v. Proofs are de.ned as certain sequences of questions. The method is grounded in Inferential Erotetic Logic.     

Admissibility of Cut in <Emphasis Type="Italic">LC</Emphasis> with Fixed Point Combinator

The fixed point combinator (Y) is an important non-proper combinator, which is defhable from a combinatorially complete base. This combinator guarantees that recursive equations have a solution. Structurally free logics (LC) turn combinators into formulas and replace structural rules by combinatory ones. This paper introduces the fixed point and the dual fixed point combinator into structurally free logics. The admissibility of (multiple) cut in the resulting calculus is not provable by a simple adaptation of the similar proof for LC with proper combinators. The novelty of our proof—beyond proving the cut for a newly extended calculus–is that we add a fourth induction to the by-and-large Gentzen-style proof. Presented by Robert Goldblatt     

A Loop-Free Decision Procedure for Modal Propositional Logics K4, S4 and S5

The aim of this paper is to present a loop-free decision procedure for modal propositional logics K4, S4 and S5. We prove that the procedure terminates and that it is sound and complete. The procedure is based on the method of Socratic proofs for modal logics, which is grounded in the logic of questions IEL.     

The Method of Socratic Proofs for Modal Propositional Logics: K5, S4.2, S4.3, S4F,S4R,S4M and G

The aim of this paper is to present the method of Socratic proofs for seven modal propositional logics: K5, S4.2, S4.3, S4M, S4F, S4R and G. This work is an extension of [10] where the method was presented for the most common modal propositional logics: K, D, T, KB, K4, S4 and S5. Presented by Jacek Malinowski     

Algorithmic Proof Methods and Cut Elimination for Implicational Logics Part I: Modal Implication

In this work we develop goal-directed deduction methods for the implicational fragment of several modal logics. We give sound and complete procedures for strict implication of K, T, K4, S4, K5, K45, KB, KTB, S5, G and for some intuitionistic variants. In order to achieve a uniform and concise presentation, we first develop our methods in the framework of Labelled Deductive Systems [Gabbay 96]. The proof systems we present are strongly analytical and satisfy a basic property of cut admissibility. We then show that for most of the systems under consideration the labelling mechanism can be avoided by choosing an appropriate way of structuring theories. One peculiar feature of our proof systems is the use of restart rules which allow to re-ask the original goal of a deduction. In case of K, K4, S4 and G, we can eliminate such a rule, without loosing completeness. In all the other cases, by dropping such a rule, we get an intuitionistic variant of each system. The present results are part of a larger project of a goal directed proof theory for non-classical logics; the purpose of this project is to show that most implicational logics stem from slight variations of a unique deduction method, and from different ways of structuring theories. Moreover, the proof systems we present follow the logic programming style of deduction and seem promising for proof search [Gabbay and Reyle 84, Miller et al. 91].     

Some Results on Modal Axiomatization and Definability for Topological Spaces

We consider two topological interpretations of the modal diamond—as the closure operator (C-semantics) and as the derived set operator (d-semantics). We call the logics arising from these interpretations C-logics and d-logics, respectively. We axiomatize a number of subclasses of the class of nodec spaces with respect to both semantics, and characterize exactly which of these classes are modally definable. It is demonstrated that the d-semantics is more expressive than the C-semantics. In particular, we show that the d-logics of the six classes of spaces considered in the paper are pairwise distinct, while the C-logics of some of them coincide. Mathematics Subject Classifications (2000): 03B45, 54G99. Presented by Michael Zakharyaschev     

The Greatest Extension of S4 into which Intuitionistic Logic is Embeddable

This paper gives a characterization of those quasi-normal extensions of the modal system S4 into which intuitionistic propositional logic Int is embeddable by the Gödel translation. It is shown that, as in the normal case, the set of quasi-normal modal companions of Int contains the greatest logic, M*, for which, however, the analog of the Blok-Esakia theorem does not hold. M* is proved to be decidable and Halldén-complete; it has the disjunction property but does not have the finite model property.     

Completeness of Certain Bimodal Logics for Subset Spaces

Subset Spaces were introduced by L. Moss and R. Parikh in [8]. These spaces model the reasoning about knowledge of changing states.In [2] a kind of subset space called intersection space was considered and the question about the existence of a set of axioms that is complete for the logic of intersection spaces was addressed. In [9] the first author introduced the class of directed spaces and proved that any set of axioms for directed frames also characterizes intersection spaces.We give here a complete axiomatization for directed spaces. We also show that it is not possible to reduce this set of axioms to a finite set.     

城乡结合部教会信徒的经济状况调查——以S市D教会为例

位于大都市城乡结合部的S市D教会是农民工占多数的教会。调查表明该会信徒的受教育程度较低。其经济状况特点是临时工合同工自谋生计者占多数,收入低于该市平均水平。参加教会活动对其经济活动并未产生明显的影响,但基督教信仰对其经济道德和诚信度有正面意义。同时宗教信仰对处于经济不确定性风险中的信徒有明显的慰藉功能。文章认为D教会并未出现如韦伯所说的新教伦理与经济发展间的促进作用。城乡结合部民工教会信徒经济水平的提高仍有赖于非宗教因素的推动。     

Everything Else Being Equal: A Modal Logic for <Emphasis Type="Italic">Ceteris Paribus</Emphasis> Preferences

This paper presents a new modal logic for ceteris paribus preferences understood in the sense of “all other things being equal”. This reading goes back to the seminal work of Von Wright in the early 1960’s and has returned in computer science in the 1990’s and in more abstract “dependency logics” today. We show how it differs from ceteris paribus as “all other things being normal”, which is used in contexts with preference defeaters. We provide a semantic analysis and several completeness theorems. We show how our system links up with Von Wright’s work, and how it applies to game-theoretic solution concepts, to agenda setting in investigation, and to preference change. We finally consider its relation with infinitary modal logics.     

My beliefs about your beliefs: a case study in theory of mind and epistemic logic

We model three examples of beliefs that agents may have about other agents’ beliefs, and provide motivation for this conceptualization from the theory of mind literature. We assume a modal logical framework for modelling degrees of belief by partially ordered preference relations. In this setting, we describe that agents believe that other agents do not distinguish among their beliefs (‘no preferences’), that agents believe that the beliefs of other agents are in part as their own (‘my preferences’), and the special case that agents believe that the beliefs of other agents are exactly as their own (‘preference refinement’). This multi-agent belief interaction is frame characterizable. We provide examples for introspective agents. We investigate which of these forms of belief interaction are preserved under three common forms of belief revision.