12,664 research outputs found
Lewis meets Brouwer: constructive strict implication
C. I. Lewis invented modern modal logic as a theory of "strict implication".
Over the classical propositional calculus one can as well work with the unary
box connective. Intuitionistically, however, the strict implication has greater
expressive power than the box and allows to make distinctions invisible in the
ordinary syntax. In particular, the logic determined by the most popular
semantics of intuitionistic K becomes a proper extension of the minimal normal
logic of the binary connective. Even an extension of this minimal logic with
the "strength" axiom, classically near-trivial, preserves the distinction
between the binary and the unary setting. In fact, this distinction and the
strong constructive strict implication itself has been also discovered by the
functional programming community in their study of "arrows" as contrasted with
"idioms". Our particular focus is on arithmetical interpretations of the
intuitionistic strict implication in terms of preservativity in extensions of
Heyting's Arithmetic.Comment: Our invited contribution to the collection "L.E.J. Brouwer, 50 years
later
Computational reverse mathematics and foundational analysis
Reverse mathematics studies which subsystems of second order arithmetic are
equivalent to key theorems of ordinary, non-set-theoretic mathematics. The main
philosophical application of reverse mathematics proposed thus far is
foundational analysis, which explores the limits of different foundations for
mathematics in a formally precise manner. This paper gives a detailed account
of the motivations and methodology of foundational analysis, which have
heretofore been largely left implicit in the practice. It then shows how this
account can be fruitfully applied in the evaluation of major foundational
approaches by a careful examination of two case studies: a partial realization
of Hilbert's program due to Simpson [1988], and predicativism in the extended
form due to Feferman and Sch\"{u}tte.
Shore [2010, 2013] proposes that equivalences in reverse mathematics be
proved in the same way as inequivalences, namely by considering only
-models of the systems in question. Shore refers to this approach as
computational reverse mathematics. This paper shows that despite some
attractive features, computational reverse mathematics is inappropriate for
foundational analysis, for two major reasons. Firstly, the computable
entailment relation employed in computational reverse mathematics does not
preserve justification for the foundational programs above. Secondly,
computable entailment is a complete relation, and hence employing it
commits one to theoretical resources which outstrip those available within any
foundational approach that is proof-theoretically weaker than
.Comment: Submitted. 41 page
An Intuitionistic Formula Hierarchy Based on High-School Identities
We revisit the notion of intuitionistic equivalence and formal proof
representations by adopting the view of formulas as exponential polynomials.
After observing that most of the invertible proof rules of intuitionistic
(minimal) propositional sequent calculi are formula (i.e. sequent) isomorphisms
corresponding to the high-school identities, we show that one can obtain a more
compact variant of a proof system, consisting of non-invertible proof rules
only, and where the invertible proof rules have been replaced by a formula
normalisation procedure.
Moreover, for certain proof systems such as the G4ip sequent calculus of
Vorob'ev, Hudelmaier, and Dyckhoff, it is even possible to see all of the
non-invertible proof rules as strict inequalities between exponential
polynomials; a careful combinatorial treatment is given in order to establish
this fact.
Finally, we extend the exponential polynomial analogy to the first-order
quantifiers, showing that it gives rise to an intuitionistic hierarchy of
formulas, resembling the classical arithmetical hierarchy, and the first one
that classifies formulas while preserving isomorphism
- …