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

Generic Modal Cut Elimination Applied to Conditional Logics

We develop a general criterion for cut elimination in sequent calculi for propositional modal logics, which rests on absorption of cut, contraction, weakening and inversion by the purely modal part of the rule system. Our criterion applies also to a wide variety of logics outside the realm of normal modal logic. We give extensive example instantiations of our framework to various conditional logics. For these, we obtain fully internalised calculi which are substantially simpler than those known in the literature, along with leaner proofs of cut elimination and complexity. In one case, conditional logic with modus ponens and conditional excluded middle, cut elimination and complexity were explicitly stated as open in the literature

A simple sequent calculus for nominal logic

Nominal logic is a variant of first-order logic that provides support for reasoning about bound names in abstract syntax. A key feature of nominal logic is the new-quantifier, which quantifies over fresh names (names not appearing in any values considered so far). Previous attempts have been made to develop convenient rules for reasoning with the new-quantifier, but we argue that none of these attempts is completely satisfactory. In this article we develop a new sequent calculus for nominal logic in which the rules for the new- quantifier are much simpler than in previous attempts. We also prove several structural and metatheoretic properties, including cut-elimination, consistency, and equivalence to Pitts' axiomatization of nominal logic

On Nested Sequents for Constructive Modal Logics

We present deductive systems for various modal logics that can be obtained from the constructive variant of the normal modal logic CK by adding combinations of the axioms d, t, b, 4, and 5. This includes the constructive variants of the standard modal logics K4, S4, and S5. We use for our presentation the formalism of nested sequents and give a syntactic proof of cut elimination.Comment: 33 page

A New Arithmetically Incomplete First- Order Extension of Gl All Theorems of Which Have Cut Free Proofs

Reference [12] introduced a novel formula to formula translation tool (“formulators”) that enables syntactic metatheoretical investigations of first-order modal logics, bypassing a need to convert them first into Gentzen style logics in order to rely on cut elimination and the subformula property. In fact, the formulator tool, as was already demonstrated in loc. cit., is applicable even to the metatheoretical study of logics such as QGL, where cut elimination is (provably, [2]) unavailable. This paper applies the formulator approach to show the independence of the axiom schema _A ! _8xA of the logics M3 and ML3 of [17, 18, 11, 13]. This leads to the conclusion that the two logics obtained by removing this axiom are incomplete, both with respect to their natural Kripke structures and to arithmetical interpretations. In particular, the so modified ML3 is, similarly to QGL, an arithmetically incomplete first-order extension of GL, but, unlike QGL, all its theorems have cut free proofs. We also establish here, via formulators, a stronger version of the disjunction property for GL and QGL without going through Gentzen versions of these logics (compare with the more complex proofs in [2, 8]).This research was partially supported by NSERC grant No. 8250

Semantics and Proof Theory of the Epsilon Calculus

The epsilon operator is a term-forming operator which replaces quantifiers in ordinary predicate logic. The application of this undervalued formalism has been hampered by the absence of well-behaved proof systems on the one hand, and accessible presentations of its theory on the other. One significant early result for the original axiomatic proof system for the epsilon-calculus is the first epsilon theorem, for which a proof is sketched. The system itself is discussed, also relative to possible semantic interpretations. The problems facing the development of proof-theoretically well-behaved systems are outlined.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1411.362

Deduction modulo theory

This paper is a survey on Deduction modulo theor

Making proofs without Modus Ponens: An introduction to the combinatorics and complexity of cut elimination

This paper is intended to provide an introduction to cut elimination which is accessible to a broad mathematical audience. Gentzen's cut elimination theorem is not as well known as it deserves to be, and it is tied to a lot of interesting mathematical structure. In particular we try to indicate some dynamical and combinatorial aspects of cut elimination, as well as its connections to complexity theory. We discuss two concrete examples where one can see the structure of short proofs with cuts, one concerning feasible numbers and the other concerning "bounded mean oscillation" from real analysis