Proof search and counter-model construction for bi-intuitionistic propositional logic with labelled sequents

Bi-intuitionistic logic is a conservative extension of intuitionistic logic with a connective dual to implication, called exclusion. We present a sound and complete cut-free labelled sequent calculus for bi-intuitionistic propositional logic, BiInt, following S. Negri's general method for devising sequent calculi for normal modal logics. Although it arises as a natural formalization of the Kripke semantics, it is does not directly support proof search. To describe a proof search procedure, we develop a more algorithmic version that also allows for counter-model extraction from a failed proof attempt.Estonian Science Foundation - grants no. 5567; 6940Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT)RESCUE - no. PTDC/EIA/65862/2006TYPES - FP6 ISTCentro de matemática da Universidade do Minh

On the Correspondence between Display Postulates and Deep Inference in Nested Sequent Calculi for Tense Logics

We consider two styles of proof calculi for a family of tense logics, presented in a formalism based on nested sequents. A nested sequent can be seen as a tree of traditional single-sided sequents. Our first style of calculi is what we call "shallow calculi", where inference rules are only applied at the root node in a nested sequent. Our shallow calculi are extensions of Kashima's calculus for tense logic and share an essential characteristic with display calculi, namely, the presence of structural rules called "display postulates". Shallow calculi enjoy a simple cut elimination procedure, but are unsuitable for proof search due to the presence of display postulates and other structural rules. The second style of calculi uses deep-inference, whereby inference rules can be applied at any node in a nested sequent. We show that, for a range of extensions of tense logic, the two styles of calculi are equivalent, and there is a natural proof theoretic correspondence between display postulates and deep inference. The deep inference calculi enjoy the subformula property and have no display postulates or other structural rules, making them a better framework for proof search

Verified Decision Procedures for Modal Logics

We describe a formalization of modal tableaux with histories for the modal logics K, KT and S4 in Lean. We describe how we formalized the static and transitional rules, the non-trivial termination and the correctness of loop-checks. The formalized tableaux are essentially executable decision procedures with soundness and completeness proved. Termination is also proved in order to define them as functions in Lean. All of these decision procedures return a concrete Kripke model in cases where the input set of formulas is satisfiable, and a proof constructed via the tableau rules witnessing unsatisfiability otherwise. We also describe an extensible formalization of backjumping and its verified implementation for the modal logic K. As far as we know, these are the first verified decision procedures for these modal logics

Uniform Interpolation in provability logics

We prove the uniform interpolation theorem in modal provability logics GL and Grz by a proof-theoretical method, using analytical and terminating sequent calculi for the logics. The calculus for G\"odel-L\"ob's logic GL is a variant of the standard sequent calculus, in the case of Grzegorczyk's logic Grz, the calculus implements an explicit loop-preventing mechanism inspired by work of Heuerding