Expansion Trees with Cut

Herbrand's theorem is one of the most fundamental insights in logic. From the syntactic point of view it suggests a compact representation of proofs in classical first- and higher-order logic by recording the information which instances have been chosen for which quantifiers, known in the literature as expansion trees. Such a representation is inherently analytic and hence corresponds to a cut-free sequent calculus proof. Recently several extensions of such proof representations to proofs with cut have been proposed. These extensions are based on graphical formalisms similar to proof nets and are limited to prenex formulas. In this paper we present a new approach that directly extends expansion trees by cuts and covers also non-prenex formulas. We describe a cut-elimination procedure for our expansion trees with cut that is based on the natural reduction steps. We prove that it is weakly normalizing using methods from the epsilon-calculus

LangPro: Natural Language Theorem Prover

LangPro is an automated theorem prover for natural language (https://github.com/kovvalsky/LangPro). Given a set of premises and a hypothesis, it is able to prove semantic relations between them. The prover is based on a version of analytic tableau method specially designed for natural logic. The proof procedure operates on logical forms that preserve linguistic expressions to a large extent. %This property makes the logical forms easily obtainable from syntactic trees. %, in particular, Combinatory Categorial Grammar derivation trees. The nature of proofs is deductive and transparent. On the FraCaS and SICK textual entailment datasets, the prover achieves high results comparable to state-of-the-art.Comment: 6 pages, 8 figures, Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) 201

From Semantic Games to Provability: The Case of Gödel Logic

We present a semantic game for Gödel logic and its extensions, where the players’ interaction stepwise reduces arbitrary claims about the relative order of truth degrees of complex formulas to atomic ones. The paper builds on a previously developed game for Gödel logic with projection operator in Fermüller et al. (in: M.-J. Lesot, S. Vieira, M.Z. Reformat, J.P. Carvalho, A. Wilbik, B. Bouchon-Meunier, and R.R. Yager, (eds.), Information processing and management of uncertainty in knowledge-based systems, Springer, Cham, 2020, pp. 257–270). This game is extended to cover Gödel logic with involutive negations and constants, and then lifted to a provability game using the concept of disjunctive strategies. Winning strategies in the provability game, with and without constants and involutive negations, turn out to correspond to analytic proofs in a version of SeqGZL (A. Ciabattoni, and T. Vetterlein, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 161(14):1941–1958, 2010) and in a sequent-of-relations calculus (M. Baaz, and Ch.G. Fermüller, in: N.V. Murray, (ed.), Automated reasoning with analytic tableaux and related methods, Springer, Berlin, 1999, pp. 36–51) respectively

On the alleged simplicity of impure proof

Roughly, a proof of a theorem, is “pure” if it draws only on what is “close” or “intrinsic” to that theorem. Mathematicians employ a variety of terms to identify pure proofs, saying that a pure proof is one that avoids what is “extrinsic,” “extraneous,” “distant,” “remote,” “alien,” or “foreign” to the problem or theorem under investigation. In the background of these attributions is the view that there is a distance measure (or a variety of such measures) between mathematical statements and proofs. Mathematicians have paid little attention to specifying such distance measures precisely because in practice certain methods of proof have seemed self- evidently impure by design: think for instance of analytic geometry and analytic number theory. By contrast, mathematicians have paid considerable attention to whether such impurities are a good thing or to be avoided, and some have claimed that they are valuable because generally impure proofs are simpler than pure proofs. This article is an investigation of this claim, formulated more precisely by proof- theoretic means. After assembling evidence from proof theory that may be thought to support this claim, we will argue that on the contrary this evidence does not support the claim

Introducing Quantified Cuts in Logic with Equality

Cut-introduction is a technique for structuring and compressing formal proofs. In this paper we generalize our cut-introduction method for the introduction of quantified lemmas of the form $\forall x.A$ (for quantifier-free $A$) to a method generating lemmas of the form $\forall x_1\ldots\forall x_n.A$. Moreover, we extend the original method to predicate logic with equality. The new method was implemented and applied to the TSTP proof database. It is shown that the extension of the method to handle equality and quantifier-blocks leads to a substantial improvement of the old algorithm

Perspectives for proof unwinding by programming languages techniques

In this chapter, we propose some future directions of work, potentially beneficial to Mathematics and its foundations, based on the recent import of methodology from the theory of programming languages into proof theory. This scientific essay, written for the audience of proof theorists as well as the working mathematician, is not a survey of the field, but rather a personal view of the author who hopes that it may inspire future and fellow researchers

Trusting Computations: a Mechanized Proof from Partial Differential Equations to Actual Program

Computer programs may go wrong due to exceptional behaviors, out-of-bound array accesses, or simply coding errors. Thus, they cannot be blindly trusted. Scientific computing programs make no exception in that respect, and even bring specific accuracy issues due to their massive use of floating-point computations. Yet, it is uncommon to guarantee their correctness. Indeed, we had to extend existing methods and tools for proving the correct behavior of programs to verify an existing numerical analysis program. This C program implements the second-order centered finite difference explicit scheme for solving the 1D wave equation. In fact, we have gone much further as we have mechanically verified the convergence of the numerical scheme in order to get a complete formal proof covering all aspects from partial differential equations to actual numerical results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time such a comprehensive proof is achieved.Comment: N° RR-8197 (2012). arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1112.179