Lewis meets Brouwer: constructive strict implication

C. I. Lewis invented modern modal logic as a theory of "strict implication". Over the classical propositional calculus one can as well work with the unary box connective. Intuitionistically, however, the strict implication has greater expressive power than the box and allows to make distinctions invisible in the ordinary syntax. In particular, the logic determined by the most popular semantics of intuitionistic K becomes a proper extension of the minimal normal logic of the binary connective. Even an extension of this minimal logic with the "strength" axiom, classically near-trivial, preserves the distinction between the binary and the unary setting. In fact, this distinction and the strong constructive strict implication itself has been also discovered by the functional programming community in their study of "arrows" as contrasted with "idioms". Our particular focus is on arithmetical interpretations of the intuitionistic strict implication in terms of preservativity in extensions of Heyting's Arithmetic.Comment: Our invited contribution to the collection "L.E.J. Brouwer, 50 years later

On natural deduction in fixpoint logics

In the current paper we present a powerful technique of obtaining natural deduction (or, in other words, Gentzen-like) proof systems for first-order fixpoint logics. The term "fixpoint logics" refers collectively to a class of logics consisting of modal logics with modalities definable at meta-level by fixpoint equations on formulas. The class was found very interesting as it contains most logics of programs with e.g. dynamic logic, temporal logic and, of course, mu-calculus among them. Fixpoint logics were intensively studied during the last decade. In this paper we are going to present some results concerning deductive systems for first-order fixpoint logics. In particular we shall present some powerful and general technique for obtaining natural deduction (Gentzen-like) systems for fixpoint logics. As those logics are usually totally undecidable, we show how to obtain complete (but infinitary) proof systems as well as relatively complete (finitistic) ones. More precisely, given fixpoint equations on formulas defining nonclassical connectives of a logic, we automatically derive Gentzen-like proof systems for the logic. The discussion of implementation problems is also provided

First-order Nilpotent Minimum Logics: first steps

Following the lines of the analysis done in [BPZ07, BCF07] for first-order G\"odel logics, we present an analogous investigation for Nilpotent Minimum logic NM. We study decidability and reciprocal inclusion of various sets of first-order tautologies of some subalgebras of the standard Nilpotent Minimum algebra. We establish a connection between the validity in an NM-chain of certain first-order formulas and its order type. Furthermore, we analyze axiomatizability, undecidability and the monadic fragments.Comment: In this version of the paper the presentation has been improved. The introduction section has been rewritten, and many modifications have been done to improve the readability; moreover, numerous references have been added. Concerning the technical side, some proofs has been shortened or made more clear, but the mathematical content is substantially the same of the previous versio

Computational reverse mathematics and foundational analysis

Reverse mathematics studies which subsystems of second order arithmetic are equivalent to key theorems of ordinary, non-set-theoretic mathematics. The main philosophical application of reverse mathematics proposed thus far is foundational analysis, which explores the limits of different foundations for mathematics in a formally precise manner. This paper gives a detailed account of the motivations and methodology of foundational analysis, which have heretofore been largely left implicit in the practice. It then shows how this account can be fruitfully applied in the evaluation of major foundational approaches by a careful examination of two case studies: a partial realization of Hilbert's program due to Simpson [1988], and predicativism in the extended form due to Feferman and Sch\"{u}tte. Shore [2010, 2013] proposes that equivalences in reverse mathematics be proved in the same way as inequivalences, namely by considering only $\omega$-models of the systems in question. Shore refers to this approach as computational reverse mathematics. This paper shows that despite some attractive features, computational reverse mathematics is inappropriate for foundational analysis, for two major reasons. Firstly, the computable entailment relation employed in computational reverse mathematics does not preserve justification for the foundational programs above. Secondly, computable entailment is a $\Pi^1_1$ complete relation, and hence employing it commits one to theoretical resources which outstrip those available within any foundational approach that is proof-theoretically weaker than $\Pi^1_1\text{-}\mathsf{CA}_0$.Comment: Submitted. 41 page

Constraint LTL Satisfiability Checking without Automata

This paper introduces a novel technique to decide the satisfiability of formulae written in the language of Linear Temporal Logic with Both future and past operators and atomic formulae belonging to constraint system D (CLTLB(D) for short). The technique is based on the concept of bounded satisfiability, and hinges on an encoding of CLTLB(D) formulae into QF-EUD, the theory of quantifier-free equality and uninterpreted functions combined with D. Similarly to standard LTL, where bounded model-checking and SAT-solvers can be used as an alternative to automata-theoretic approaches to model-checking, our approach allows users to solve the satisfiability problem for CLTLB(D) formulae through SMT-solving techniques, rather than by checking the emptiness of the language of a suitable automaton A_{\phi}. The technique is effective, and it has been implemented in our Zot formal verification tool.Comment: 39 page