Sequent Calculus in the Topos of Trees

Nakano's "later" modality, inspired by G\"{o}del-L\"{o}b provability logic, has been applied in type systems and program logics to capture guarded recursion. Birkedal et al modelled this modality via the internal logic of the topos of trees. We show that the semantics of the propositional fragment of this logic can be given by linear converse-well-founded intuitionistic Kripke frames, so this logic is a marriage of the intuitionistic modal logic KM and the intermediate logic LC. We therefore call this logic $\mathrm{KM}_{\mathrm{lin}}$. We give a sound and cut-free complete sequent calculus for $\mathrm{KM}_{\mathrm{lin}}$ via a strategy that decomposes implication into its static and irreflexive components. Our calculus provides deterministic and terminating backward proof-search, yields decidability of the logic and the coNP-completeness of its validity problem. Our calculus and decision procedure can be restricted to drop linearity and hence capture KM.Comment: Extended version, with full proof details, of a paper accepted to FoSSaCS 2015 (this version edited to fix some minor typos

Logics for modelling collective attitudes

We introduce a number of logics to reason about collective propositional attitudes that are defined by means of the majority rule. It is well known that majoritarian aggregation is subject to irrationality, as the results in social choice theory and judgment aggregation show. The proposed logics for modelling collective attitudes are based on a substructural propositional logic that allows for circumventing inconsistent outcomes. Individual and collective propositional attitudes, such as beliefs, desires, obligations, are then modelled by means of minimal modalities to ensure a number of basic principles. In this way, a viable consistent modelling of collective attitudes is obtained

Sequent calculi and decidability for intuitionistic hybrid logic

AbstractIn this paper we study the proof theory of the first constructive version of hybrid logic called Intuitionistic Hybrid Logic (IHL) in order to prove its decidability. In this perspective we propose a sequent-style natural deduction system and then the first sequent calculus for this logic. We prove its main properties like soundness, completeness and also the cut-elimination property. Finally we provide, from our calculus, the first decision procedure for IHL and then prove its decidability

Multiple Conclusion Rules in Logics with the Disjunction Property

We prove that for the intermediate logics with the disjunction property any basis of admissible rules can be reduced to a basis of admissible m-rules (multiple-conclusion rules), and every basis of admissible m-rules can be reduced to a basis of admissible rules. These results can be generalized to a broad class of logics including positive logic and its extensions, Johansson logic, normal extensions of S4, n-transitive logics and intuitionistic modal logics

Fixed-point elimination in the intuitionistic propositional calculus

It is a consequence of existing literature that least and greatest fixed-points of monotone polynomials on Heyting algebras-that is, the algebraic models of the Intuitionistic Propositional Calculus-always exist, even when these algebras are not complete as lattices. The reason is that these extremal fixed-points are definable by formulas of the IPC. Consequently, the $\mu$-calculus based on intuitionistic logic is trivial, every $\mu$-formula being equivalent to a fixed-point free formula. We give in this paper an axiomatization of least and greatest fixed-points of formulas, and an algorithm to compute a fixed-point free formula equivalent to a given $\mu$-formula. The axiomatization of the greatest fixed-point is simple. The axiomatization of the least fixed-point is more complex, in particular every monotone formula converges to its least fixed-point by Kleene's iteration in a finite number of steps, but there is no uniform upper bound on the number of iterations. We extract, out of the algorithm, upper bounds for such n, depending on the size of the formula. For some formulas, we show that these upper bounds are polynomial and optimal

Itauto: An Extensible Intuitionistic SAT Solver

We present the design and implementation of itauto, a Coq reflexive tactic for intuitionistic propositional logic. The tactic inherits features found in modern SAT solvers: definitional conjunctive normal form; lazy unit propagation and conflict driven backjumping. Formulae are hash-consed using native integers thus enabling a fast equality test and a pervasive use of Patricia Trees. We also propose a hybrid proof by reflection scheme whereby the extracted solver calls user-defined tactics on the leaves of the propositional proof search thus enabling theory reasoning and the generation of conflict clauses. The solver has decent efficiency and is more scalable than existing tactics on synthetic benchmarks and preliminary experiments are encouraging for existing developments

On formal aspects of the epistemic approach to paraconsistency

This paper reviews the central points and presents some recent developments of the epistemic approach to paraconsistency in terms of the preservation of evidence. Two formal systems are surveyed, the basic logic of evidence (BLE) and the logic of evidence and truth (LET J ), designed to deal, respectively, with evidence and with evidence and truth. While BLE is equivalent to Nelson’s logic N4, it has been conceived for a different purpose. Adequate valuation semantics that provide decidability are given for both BLE and LET J . The meanings of the connectives of BLE and LET J , from the point of view of preservation of evidence, is explained with the aid of an inferential semantics. A formalization of the notion of evidence for BLE as proposed by M. Fitting is also reviewed here. As a novel result, the paper shows that LET J is semantically characterized through the so-called Fidel structures. Some opportunities for further research are also discussed

Refutation Systems : An Overview and Some Applications to Philosophical Logics

Refutation systems are systems of formal, syntactic derivations, designed to derive the non-valid formulas or logical consequences of a given logic. Here we provide an overview with comprehensive references on the historical development of the theory of refutation systems and discuss some of their applications to philosophical logics