Proof Theory of Finite-valued Logics

The proof theory of many-valued systems has not been investigated to an extent comparable to the work done on axiomatizatbility of many-valued logics. Proof theory requires appropriate formalisms, such as sequent calculus, natural deduction, and tableaux for classical (and intuitionistic) logic. One particular method for systematically obtaining calculi for all finite-valued logics was invented independently by several researchers, with slight variations in design and presentation. The main aim of this report is to develop the proof theory of finite-valued first order logics in a general way, and to present some of the more important results in this area. In Systems covered are the resolution calculus, sequent calculus, tableaux, and natural deduction. This report is actually a template, from which all results can be specialized to particular logics

Proceedings of the Joint Automated Reasoning Workshop and Deduktionstreffen: As part of the Vienna Summer of Logic – IJCAR 23-24 July 2014

Preface For many years the British and the German automated reasoning communities have successfully run independent series of workshops for anybody working in the area of automated reasoning. Although open to the general public they addressed in the past primarily the British and the German communities, respectively. At the occasion of the Vienna Summer of Logic the two series have a joint event in Vienna as an IJCAR workshop. In the spirit of the two series there will be only informal proceedings with abstracts of the works presented. These are collected in this document. We have tried to maintain the informal open atmosphere of the two series and have welcomed in particular research students to present their work. We have solicited for all work related to automated reasoning and its applications with a particular interest in work-in-progress and the presentation of half-baked ideas. As in the previous years, we have aimed to bring together researchers from all areas of automated reasoning in order to foster links among researchers from various disciplines; among theoreticians, implementers and users alike, and among international communities, this year not just the British and German communities

Efficient Constraints on Possible Worlds for Reasoning About Necessity

Modal logics offer natural, declarative representations for describing both the modular structure of logical specifications and the attitudes and behaviors of agents. The results of this paper further the goal of building practical, efficient reasoning systems using modal logics. The key problem in modal deduction is reasoning about the world in a model (or scope in a proof) at which an inference rule is applied - a potentially hard problem. This paper investigates the use of partial-order mechanisms to maintain constraints on the application of modal rules in proof search in restricted languages. The main result is a simple, incremental polynomial-time algorithm to correctly order rules in proof trees for combinations of K, K4, T and S4 necessity operators governed by a variety of interactions, assuming an encoding of negation using a scoped constant ⊥. This contrasts with previous equational unification methods, which have exponential performance in general because they simply guess among possible intercalations of modal operators. The new, fast algorithm is appropriate for use in a wide variety of applications of modal logic, from planning to logic programming

Efficient Constraints on Possible Worlds for Reasoning about Necessity

Modal logics offer natural, declarative representations for describing both the modular structure of logical specifications and the attitudes and behaviors of agents. The results of this paper further the goal of building practical, efficient reasoning systems using modal logics. The key problem in modal deduction is reasoning about the world in a model (or scope in a proof) at which an inference rule is applied—a potentially hard problem. This paper investigates the use of partial-order mechanisms to maintain constraints on the application of modal rules in proof search in restricted languages. The main result is a simple, incremental polynomial-time algorithm to correctly order rules in proof trees for combinations of K, K4, T and S4 necessity operators governed by a variety of interactions, assuming an encoding of negation using a scoped constant ┴. This contrasts with previous equational unification methods, which have exponential performance in general because they simply guess among possible intercalations of modal operators. The new, fast algorithm is appropriate for use in a wide variety of applications of modal logic, from planning to logic programming

Towards Automated Reasoning in Herbrand Structures

Herbrand structures have the advantage, computationally speaking, of being guided by the definability of all elements in them. A salient feature of the logics induced by them is that they internally exhibit the induction scheme, thus providing a congenial, computationally-oriented framework for formal inductive reasoning. Nonetheless, their enhanced expressivity renders any effective proof system for them incomplete. Furthermore, the fact that they are not compact poses yet another prooftheoretic challenge. This paper offers several layers for coping with the inherent incompleteness and non-compactness of these logics. First, two types of infinitary proof system are introduced—one of infinite width and one of infinite height—which manipulate infinite sequents and are sound and complete for the intended semantics. The restriction of these systems to finite sequents induces a completeness result for finite entailments. Then, in search of effectiveness, two finite approximations of these systems are presented and explored. Interestingly, the approximation of the infinite-width system via an explicit induction scheme turns out to be weaker than the effective cyclic fragment of the infinite-height system

Representing scope in intuitionistic deductions

AbstractIntuitionistic proofs can be segmented into scopes which describe when assumptions can be used. In standard descriptions of intuitionistic logic, these scopes occupy contiguous regions of proofs. This leads to an explosion in the search space for automated deduction, because of the difficulty of planning to apply a rule inside a particular scoped region of the proof. This paper investigates an alternative representation which assigns scope explicitly to formulas, and which is inspired in part by semantics-based translation methods for modal deduction. This calculus is simple and is justified by direct proof-theoretic arguments that transform proofs in the calculus so that scopes match standard descriptions. A Herbrand theorem, established straightforwardly, lifts this calculus to incorporate unification. The resulting system has no impermutabilities whatsoever — rules of inference may be used equivalently anywhere in the proof. Nevertheless, a natural specification describes how λ-terms are to be extracted from its deductions

Representing Scope in Intuitionistic Deductions

Intuitionistic proofs can be segmented into scopes which describe when assumptions can be used. In standard descriptions of intuitionistic logic, these scopes occupy contiguous regions of proofs. This leads to an explosion in the search space for automated deduction, because of the difficulty of planning to apply a rule inside a particular scoped region of the proof. This paper investigates an alternative representation which assigns scope explicitly to formulas, and which is inspired in part by semantics-based translation methods for modal deduction. This calculus is simple and is justified by direct proof-theoretic arguments that transform proofs in the calculus so that scopes match standard descriptions. A Herbrand theorem, established straightforwardly, lifts this calculus to incorporate unification. The resulting system has no impermutabilities whatsoever—rules of inference may be used equivalently anywhere in the proof. Nevertheless, a natural specification describes how λ-terms are to be extracted from its deductions