Some Remarks on Relations between Proofs and Games

International audienceThis paper aims at studying relations between proof systems and games in a given logic and at analyzing what can be the interest and limits of a game formulation as an alternative semantic framework for modelling proof search and also for understanding relations between logics. In this perspective, we firstly study proofs and games at an abstract level which is neither related to a particular logic nor adopts a specific focus on their relations. Then, in order to instantiate such an analysis, we describe a dialogue game for intu-itionistic logic and emphasize the adequateness between proofs and winning strategies in this game. Finally, we consider how games can be seen to provide an alternative formulation for proof search and we stress on the possible mix of logical rules and search strategies inside games rules. We conclude on the merits and limits of the game semantics as a tool for studying logics, validity in these logics and some relations between them. 2 Proofs and Games In this section, we present a common terminology to present both proof systems and games at a relatively abstract level. Our aim consists in obtaining tools on which bridges can be built between the proof-theoretical approach and the game semantics approach in establishing the (universal) validity of logical formulae. We explain how proofs and games can be viewed as complementary notions. We illustrate how proof trees in calculi correspond to winning strategies in games and vice-versa

Hyper Natural Deduction

Paper introduces a Hyper Natural Deduction system as an extension of Gentzen's Natural Deduction system, by adding additional rules providing means for communication between derivations. It is shown that the Hyper Natural Deduction system is sound and complete for infinite-valued propositional Gödel Logic, by giving translations to and from Avron's Hyper sequent Calculus. The paper also provides conversions for normalisation and prove the existence of normal forms for the Hyper Natural Deduction system

Hyper Natural Deduction for Gödel Logic—A natural deduction system for parallel reasoning

We introduce a system of Hyper Natural Deduction for Gödel Logic as an extension of Gentzen’s system of Natural Deduction. A deduction in this system consists of a finite set of derivations which uses the typical rules of Natural Deduction, plus additional rules providing means for communication between derivations. We show that our system is sound and complete for infinite-valued propositional Gödel Logic, by giving translations to and from Avron’s Hypersequent Calculus. We provide conversions for normalization extending usual conversions for Natural Deduction and prove the existence of normal forms for Hyper Natural Deduction for Gödel Logic. We show that normal deductions satisfy the subformula property

Hilbert's Metamathematical Problems and Their Solutions

This dissertation examines several of the problems that Hilbert discovered in the foundations of mathematics, from a metalogical perspective. The problems manifest themselves in four different aspects of Hilbert’s views: (i) Hilbert’s axiomatic approach to the foundations of mathematics; (ii) His response to criticisms of set theory; (iii) His response to intuitionist criticisms of classical mathematics; (iv) Hilbert’s contribution to the specification of the role of logical inference in mathematical reasoning. This dissertation argues that Hilbert’s axiomatic approach was guided primarily by model theoretical concerns. Accordingly, the ultimate aim of his consistency program was to prove the model-theoretical consistency of mathematical theories. It turns out that for the purpose of carrying out such consistency proofs, a suitable modification of the ordinary first-order logic is needed. To effect this modification, independence-friendly logic is needed as the appropriate conceptual framework. It is then shown how the model theoretical consistency of arithmetic can be proved by using IF logic as its basic logic. Hilbert’s other problems, manifesting themselves as aspects (ii), (iii), and (iv)—most notably the problem of the status of the axiom of choice, the problem of the role of the law of excluded middle, and the problem of giving an elementary account of quantification—can likewise be approached by using the resources of IF logic. It is shown that by means of IF logic one can carry out Hilbertian solutions to all these problems. The two major results concerning aspects (ii), (iii) and (iv) are the following: (a) The axiom of choice is a logical principle; (b) The law of excluded middle divides metamathematical methods into elementary and non-elementary ones. It is argued that these results show that IF logic helps to vindicate Hilbert’s nominalist philosophy of mathematics. On the basis of an elementary approach to logic, which enriches the expressive resources of ordinary first-order logic, this dissertation shows how the different problems that Hilbert discovered in the foundations of mathematics can be solved

A General Semantics for Logics of Affirmation and Negation

A general framework for translating various logical systems is presented, including a set of partial unary operators of affirmation and negation. Despite its usual reading, affirmation is not redundant in any domain of values and whenever it does not behave like a full mapping. After depicting the process of partial functions, a number of logics are translated through a variety of affirmations and a unique pair of negations. This relies upon two preconditions: a deconstruction of truth-values as ordered and structured objects, unlike its mainstream presentation as a simple object; a redefinition of the Principle of Bivalence as a set of four independent properties, such that its definition does not equate with normality

Constructive Type Theory and the Dialogical Approach to Meaning

In its origins Dialogical logic constituted one part of a new movement called the Erlangen School or Erlangen Constructivism. Its goal was to provide a new start to a general theory of language and of science. According to the Erlangen-School, language is not just a fact that we discover, but a human cultural accomplishment whose construction reason can and should control. The resulting project of intentionally constructing a scientific language was called the Orthosprache-project. Unfortunately, the Orthosprache-project was not further developed and seemed to fade away. It is possible that one of the reasons for this fading away is that the link between dialogical logic and Orthosprache was not sufficiently developed - in particular, the new theory of meaning to be found in dialogical logic seemed to be cut off from both the project of establishing the basis for scientific language and also from a general theory of meaning. We would like to contribute to clarifying one possible way in which a general dialogical theory of meaning could be linked to dialogical logic. The idea behind the proposal is to make use of constructive type theory in which logical inferences are preceded by the description of a fully interpreted language. The latter, we think, provides the means for a new start not only for the project of Orthosprache, but also for a general dialogical theory of meaning

Paul Lorenzen -- Mathematician and Logician

This open access book examines the many contributions of Paul Lorenzen, an outstanding philosopher from the latter half of the 20th century. It features papers focused on integrating Lorenzen's original approach into the history of logic and mathematics. The papers also explore how practitioners can implement Lorenzen’s systematical ideas in today’s debates on proof-theoretic semantics, databank management, and stochastics. Coverage details key contributions of Lorenzen to constructive mathematics, Lorenzen’s work on lattice-groups and divisibility theory, and modern set theory and Lorenzen’s critique of actual infinity. The contributors also look at the main problem of Grundlagenforschung and Lorenzen’s consistency proof and Hilbert’s larger program. In addition, the papers offer a constructive examination of a Russell-style Ramified Type Theory and a way out of the circularity puzzle within the operative justification of logic and mathematics. Paul Lorenzen's name is associated with the Erlangen School of Methodical Constructivism, of which the approach in linguistic philosophy and philosophy of science determined philosophical discussions especially in Germany in the 1960s and 1970s. This volume features 10 papers from a meeting that took place at the University of Konstanz

Totuus, todistettavuus ja gödeliläiset argumentit : Tarskilaisen totuuden puolustus matematiikassa

Eräs tärkeimmistä kysymyksistä matematiikanfilosofiassa on totuuden ja formaalin todistettavuuden välinen suhde. Kantaa, jonka mukaan nämä kaksi käsitettä ovat yksi ja sama, kutsutaan deflationismiksi, ja vastakkaista näkökulmaa substantialismiksi. Ensimmäisessä epätäydellisyyslauseessaan Kurt Gödel todisti, että kaikki ristiriidattomat ja aritmetiikan sisältävät formaalit systeemit sisältävät lauseita, joita ei voida sen enempää todistaa kuin osoittaa epätosiksi kyseisen systeemin sisällä. Tällaiset Gödel-lauseet voidaan kuitenkin osoittaa tosiksi, jos laajennamme formaalia systeemiä Alfred Tarskin semanttisella totuusteorialla, kuten Stewart Shapiro ja Jeffrey Ketland ovat näyttäneet semanttisissa argumenteissaan substantialismin puolesta. Heidän mukaansa Gödel-lauseet ovat eksplisiittinen tapaus todesta lauseesta, jota ei voida todistaa, ja siten deflationismi on kumottu. Tätä vastaan Neil Tennant on näyttänyt, että tarskilaisen totuuden sijaan voimme laajentaa formaalia systeemiä ns. pätevyysperiaatteella, jonka mukaan kaikki todistettavat lauseet ovat ”väitettävissä”, ja josta seuraa myös Gödel-lauseiden väitettävyys. Relevantti kysymys ei siis ole se pystytäänkö Gödel-lauseiden totuus osoittamaan, vaan se onko tarskilainen totuus hyväksyttävämpi laajennus kuin pätevyysperiaate. Tässä työssä väitän, että tätä ongelmaa on paras lähestyä ajattelemalla matematiikkaa ilmiönä, joka on laajempi kuin pelkästään formaalit systeemit. Kun otamme huomioon esiformaalin matemaattisen ajattelun, huomaamme että tarskilainen totuus ei itse asiassa ole laajennus lainkaan. Väitän, että totuus on esiformaalissa matematiikassa sitä mitä todistettavuus on formaalissa, ja tarskilainen semanttinen totuuskäsitys kuvaa tätä suhdetta tarkasti. Deflationisti voi kuitenkin argumentoida, että vaikka esiformaali matematiikka on olemassa, voi se silti olla filosofisesti merkityksetöntä mikäli se ei viittaa mihinkään objektiiviseen. Tätä vastaan väitän, että kaikki todella deflationistiset teoriat johtavat matematiikan mielivaltaisuuteen. Kaikissa muissa matematiikanfilosofisissa teorioissa on tilaa objektiiviselle viittaukselle, ja laajennus tarskilaiseen totuuteen voidaan tehdä luonnollisesti. Väitän siis, että mikäli matematiikan mielivaltaisuus hylätään, täytyy hyväksyä totuuden substantiaalisuus. Muita tähän liittyviä aiheita, kuten uusfregeläisyyttä, käsitellään myös tässä työssä, eikä niiden todeta poistavan tarvetta tarskilaiselle totuudelle. Ainoa jäljelle jäävä mahdollisuus deflationistille on vaihtaa logiikkaa niin, että formaalit kielet voivat sisältää omat totuuspredikaattinsa. Tarski osoitti tämän mahdottomaksi klassisille ensimmäisen kertaluvun kielille, mutta muilla logiikoilla ei välttämättä olisi lainkaan tarvetta laajentaa formaaleja systeemejä, ja yllä esitetty argumentti ei pätisi. Vaihtoehtoisista tavoista keskityn tässä työssä eniten Jaakko Hintikan ja Gabriel Sandun ”riippumattomuusystävälliseen” IF-logiikkaan. Hintikka on väittänyt, että IF-kieli voi sisältää oman adekvaatin totuuspredikaattinsa. Väitän kuitenkin, että vaikka tämä onkin totta, tätä predikaattia ei voida tunnistaa totuuspredikaatiksi saman IF-kielen sisäisesti, ja siten tarve tarskilaiselle totuudelle säilyy. IF-logiikan lisäksi myös toisen kertaluvun klassinen logiikka ja Saul Kripken käyttämä Kleenen logiikka epäonnistuvat samalla tavalla

Proof-theoretic Semantics for Intuitionistic Multiplicative Linear Logic

This work is the first exploration of proof-theoretic semantics for a substructural logic. It focuses on the base-extension semantics (B-eS) for intuitionistic multiplicative linear logic (IMLL). The starting point is a review of Sandqvist’s B-eS for intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL), for which we propose an alternative treatment of conjunction that takes the form of the generalized elimination rule for the connective. The resulting semantics is shown to be sound and complete. This motivates our main contribution, a B-eS for IMLL , in which the definitions of the logical constants all take the form of their elimination rule and for which soundness and completeness are established