Using Extended Tactics to Do Proof Transformations

In this thesis we develop a comprehensive human-oriented theorem proving system that integrates several different proof systems. The main theorem proving environment centers around a natural Gentzen first-order logic system. This allows construction of natural proofs, encourages user involvement in the search for proofs, and facilitates understanding of the resulting proofs. We integrate more abstract automatically generated proofs such as resolution refutations by transforming them to proofs in the Gentzen system. Expansion trees are another proof system used as an intermediate stage in transformations between the abstract and natural systems. They are a compact representation useful for transformations and other computations. We develop a programming language approach to theorem proving based on tactics and tacticals. Our extended tactics provide a method for doing proof transformations, as well as facilitate interactive theorem proving, allowing full integration of interactive and automatic theorem proving. In the system, we explicitly represent proofs in each proof system and view expansion tree proofs as types for Gentzen proof terms. This explicit proof representation allows proofs to be manipulated as meaningful data objects and used in various computations. For example, the proof terms in the natural Gentzen system can be used to obtain natural language explanations of proofs. We foresee several applications for this kind of theorem proving system, such as use as a logic tutor, a tool for doing mathematics, or an enhanced reasoner and explanation facility for existing A1 systems

Computational Natural Deduction

The formalization of the notion of a logically sound argument as a natural deduction proof offers the prospect of a computer program capable of constructing such arguments for conclusions of interest. We present a constructive definition for a new subclass of natural deduction proofs, called atomic normal form (ANF) proofs. A natural deduction proof is readily understood as an argument leading from a set of premisses, by way of simple principles of reasoning, to the conclusion of interest. ANF extends this explanative power of natural deduction. The very detailed steps of the argument are replaced by derived rules of inference, each of which is justified by a particular input formula. ANF constitutes a proof theoretically well motivated normal form for natural deduction. Computational techniques developed for resolution refutation based systems are directly applicable to the task of constructing ANF proofs. We analyse a range of languages in this framework, extending from the simple Horn language to the full classical calculus. This analysis is applied to provide a natural deduction based account for existing logic programming languages, and to extend current logic programming implementation techniques towards more expressive languages. We consider the visualization of proofs, failure demonstrations, search spaces and the proof search process. Such visualization can be used for the purposes of explanation and to gain an understanding of the proof search process. We propose introspection based architecture for problem solvers based on natural deduction. The architecture offers a logic based meta language to overcome the combinatorial and other practical problems faced by the problem solver

Glue TAG semantics for binary branching syntactic structures

This thesis presents Gl-TAG, a new semantics for a fragment of natural language including simple in/transitive sentences with quantifiers. Gl-TAG utilises glue semantics, a proof-theoretic semantics based on linear logic, and TAG, a tree-based syntactic theory. We demonstrate that Gl-TAG is compositional, and bears interesting similarities to other approaches to the semantics of quantifiers. Chapter 1, rather than discussing the arguments of the thesis as a whole, outlines the global picture of language and semantic theory we adopt, introducing different semantics for quantification, so that Gl-TAG is understood in the proper context. Chapter 2, the heart of the thesis, introduces Gl-TAG, illustrating its application to quantifier scope ambiguity (Qscope ambiguity) and binding. Ways of constricting quantifier scope where necessary are suggested, but their full development is a topic of future research. Chapter 3 demonstrates that our semantics is compositional in certain formal senses there distinguished. Our account of quantification bears striking similarities to that proposed in Heim and Kratzer (1998), and also to Cooper storage (Cooper ((1983))); in fact, we can set up a form of Cooper storage within Gl-TAG. We suggest in conclusion that the features in common between frameworks highlight the possible formal similarities between the approaches. One philosophically interesting aspect of our semantics left aside is that it depends on proof theoretic methods; glue semantics combines semantic values both by harnessing the inferential power of linear logic and by exploiting the Curry-Howard isomorphism (CHI) familiar from proof theory (see chapter 2 for a brief explanation of the CHI). The semantic value of a proposition is thus a proof, as some proof theorists have desired (see Martin-Lof (1996). This raises a question for future research; namely, whether Gl-TAG is an inferential semantics in the sense that some philosophers have discussed (Murzi and Steinberger (2015))

On Hilberg's Law and Its Links with Guiraud's Law

Hilberg (1990) supposed that finite-order excess entropy of a random human text is proportional to the square root of the text length. Assuming that Hilberg's hypothesis is true, we derive Guiraud's law, which states that the number of word types in a text is greater than proportional to the square root of the text length. Our derivation is based on some mathematical conjecture in coding theory and on several experiments suggesting that words can be defined approximately as the nonterminals of the shortest context-free grammar for the text. Such operational definition of words can be applied even to texts deprived of spaces, which do not allow for Mandelbrot's ``intermittent silence'' explanation of Zipf's and Guiraud's laws. In contrast to Mandelbrot's, our model assumes some probabilistic long-memory effects in human narration and might be capable of explaining Menzerath's law.Comment: To appear in Journal of Quantitative Linguistic

Conceptual evaluation: epistemic

On a view implicitly endorsed by many, a concept is epistemically better than another if and because it does a better job at ‘carving at the joints', or if the property corresponding to it is ‘more natural' than the one corresponding to another. This chapter offers an argument against this seemingly plausible thought, starting from three key observations about the way we use and evaluate concepts from en epistemic perspective: that we look for concepts that play a role in explanations of things that cry out for explanation; that we evaluate not only ‘empirical' concepts, but also mathematical and perhaps moral concepts from an epistemic perspective; and that there is much more complexity to the concept/property relation than the natural thought seems to presuppose. These observations, it is argued, rule out giving a theory of conceptual evaluation that is a corollary of a metaphysical ranking of the relevant properties. conceptual ethics, explanation, naturalness, epistemic value, concept/property, semantic internalis

An Objection to Naturalism and Atheism from Logic

I proffer a success argument for classical logical consequence. I articulate in what sense that notion of consequence should be regarded as the privileged notion for metaphysical inquiry aimed at uncovering the fundamental nature of the world. Classical logic breeds necessitism. I use necessitism to produce problems for both ontological naturalism and atheism