5,553 research outputs found
Virtual Evidence: A Constructive Semantics for Classical Logics
This article presents a computational semantics for classical logic using
constructive type theory. Such semantics seems impossible because classical
logic allows the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM), not accepted in constructive
logic since it does not have computational meaning. However, the apparently
oracular powers expressed in the LEM, that for any proposition P either it or
its negation, not P, is true can also be explained in terms of constructive
evidence that does not refer to "oracles for truth." Types with virtual
evidence and the constructive impossibility of negative evidence provide
sufficient semantic grounds for classical truth and have a simple computational
meaning. This idea is formalized using refinement types, a concept of
constructive type theory used since 1984 and explained here. A new axiom
creating virtual evidence fully retains the constructive meaning of the logical
operators in classical contexts.
Key Words: classical logic, constructive logic, intuitionistic logic,
propositions-as-types, constructive type theory, refinement types, double
negation translation, computational content, virtual evidenc
Kripke Models for Classical Logic
We introduce a notion of Kripke model for classical logic for which we
constructively prove soundness and cut-free completeness. We discuss the
novelty of the notion and its potential applications
Logic of Intuitionistic Interactive Proofs (Formal Theory of Perfect Knowledge Transfer)
We produce a decidable super-intuitionistic normal modal logic of
internalised intuitionistic (and thus disjunctive and monotonic) interactive
proofs (LIiP) from an existing classical counterpart of classical monotonic
non-disjunctive interactive proofs (LiP). Intuitionistic interactive proofs
effect a durable epistemic impact in the possibly adversarial communication
medium CM (which is imagined as a distinguished agent), and only in that, that
consists in the permanent induction of the perfect and thus disjunctive
knowledge of their proof goal by means of CM's knowledge of the proof: If CM
knew my proof then CM would persistently and also disjunctively know that my
proof goal is true. So intuitionistic interactive proofs effect a lasting
transfer of disjunctive propositional knowledge (disjunctively knowable facts)
in the communication medium of multi-agent distributed systems via the
transmission of certain individual knowledge (knowable intuitionistic proofs).
Our (necessarily) CM-centred notion of proof is also a disjunctive explicit
refinement of KD45-belief, and yields also such a refinement of standard
S5-knowledge. Monotonicity but not communality is a commonality of LiP, LIiP,
and their internalised notions of proof. As a side-effect, we offer a short
internalised proof of the Disjunction Property of Intuitionistic Logic
(originally proved by Goedel).Comment: continuation of arXiv:1201.3667; extended start of Section 1 and 2.1;
extended paragraph after Fact 1; dropped the N-rule as primitive and proved
it derivable; other, non-intuitionistic family members: arXiv:1208.1842,
arXiv:1208.591
Ecumenical modal logic
The discussion about how to put together Gentzen's systems for classical and
intuitionistic logic in a single unified system is back in fashion. Indeed,
recently Prawitz and others have been discussing the so called Ecumenical
Systems, where connectives from these logics can co-exist in peace. In Prawitz'
system, the classical logician and the intuitionistic logician would share the
universal quantifier, conjunction, negation, and the constant for the absurd,
but they would each have their own existential quantifier, disjunction, and
implication, with different meanings. Prawitz' main idea is that these
different meanings are given by a semantical framework that can be accepted by
both parties. In a recent work, Ecumenical sequent calculi and a nested system
were presented, and some very interesting proof theoretical properties of the
systems were established. In this work we extend Prawitz' Ecumenical idea to
alethic K-modalities
Logic in Opposition
It is claimed hereby that, against a current view of logic as a theory of consequence, opposition is a basic logical concept that can be used to define consequence itself. This requires some substantial changes in the underlying framework, including: a non-Fregean semantics of questions and answers, instead of the usual truth-conditional semantics; an extension of opposition as a relation between any structured objects; a definition of oppositions in terms of basic negation. Objections to this claim will be reviewed
On formal aspects of the epistemic approach to paraconsistency
This paper reviews the central points and presents some recent developments of the epistemic approach to paraconsistency in terms of the preservation of evidence. Two formal systems are surveyed, the basic logic of evidence (BLE) and the logic of evidence and truth (LET J ), designed to deal, respectively, with evidence and with evidence and truth. While BLE is equivalent to Nelson’s logic N4, it has been conceived for a different purpose. Adequate valuation semantics that provide decidability are given for both BLE and LET J . The meanings of the connectives of BLE and LET J , from the point of view of preservation of evidence, is explained with the aid of an inferential semantics. A formalization of the notion of evidence for BLE as proposed by M. Fitting is also reviewed here. As a novel result, the paper shows that LET J is semantically characterized through the so-called Fidel structures. Some opportunities for further research are also discussed
Linear logic for constructive mathematics
We show that numerous distinctive concepts of constructive mathematics arise
automatically from an interpretation of "linear higher-order logic" into
intuitionistic higher-order logic via a Chu construction. This includes
apartness relations, complemented subsets, anti-subgroups and anti-ideals,
strict and non-strict order pairs, cut-valued metrics, and apartness spaces. We
also explain the constructive bifurcation of classical concepts using the
choice between multiplicative and additive linear connectives. Linear logic
thus systematically "constructivizes" classical definitions and deals
automatically with the resulting bookkeeping, and could potentially be used
directly as a basis for constructive mathematics in place of intuitionistic
logic.Comment: 39 page
A Galois connection between classical and intuitionistic logics. I: Syntax
In a 1985 commentary to his collected works, Kolmogorov remarked that his
1932 paper "was written in hope that with time, the logic of solution of
problems [i.e., intuitionistic logic] will become a permanent part of a
[standard] course of logic. A unified logical apparatus was intended to be
created, which would deal with objects of two types - propositions and
problems." We construct such a formal system QHC, which is a conservative
extension of both the intuitionistic predicate calculus QH and the classical
predicate calculus QC.
The only new connectives ? and ! of QHC induce a Galois connection (i.e., a
pair of adjoint functors) between the Lindenbaum posets (i.e. the underlying
posets of the Lindenbaum algebras) of QH and QC. Kolmogorov's double negation
translation of propositions into problems extends to a retraction of QHC onto
QH; whereas Goedel's provability translation of problems into modal
propositions extends to a retraction of QHC onto its QC+(?!) fragment,
identified with the modal logic QS4. The QH+(!?) fragment is an intuitionistic
modal logic, whose modality !? is a strict lax modality in the sense of Aczel -
and thus resembles the squash/bracket operation in intuitionistic type
theories.
The axioms of QHC attempt to give a fuller formalization (with respect to the
axioms of intuitionistic logic) to the two best known contentual
interpretations of intiuitionistic logic: Kolmogorov's problem interpretation
(incorporating standard refinements by Heyting and Kreisel) and the proof
interpretation by Orlov and Heyting (as clarified by G\"odel). While these two
interpretations are often conflated, from the viewpoint of the axioms of QHC
neither of them reduces to the other one, although they do overlap.Comment: 47 pages. The paper is rewritten in terms of a formal meta-logic (a
simplified version of Isabelle's meta-logic
Perspectives for proof unwinding by programming languages techniques
In this chapter, we propose some future directions of work, potentially
beneficial to Mathematics and its foundations, based on the recent import of
methodology from the theory of programming languages into proof theory. This
scientific essay, written for the audience of proof theorists as well as the
working mathematician, is not a survey of the field, but rather a personal view
of the author who hopes that it may inspire future and fellow researchers
- …