Permutability of proofs in intuitionistic sequent calculi

We prove a folklore theorem, that two derivations in a cut-free sequent calculus for intuitionistic propositional logic (based on Kleene's {\bf G3}) are inter-permutable (using a set of basic "permutation reduction rules'' derived from Kleene's work in 1952) iff they determine the same natural deduction. The basic rules form a confluent and weakly normalising rewriting system. We refer to Schwichtenberg's proof elsewhere that a modification of this system is strongly normalising.União Europeia (UE) - Programa ESPRIT BRA 7232 GENTZEN.Centro de Matemática da Universidade do Minho (CMAT)

Proof search issues in some non-classical logics

This thesis develops techniques and ideas on proof search. Proof search is used with one of two meanings. Proof search can be thought of either as the search for a yes/no answer to a query (theorem proving), or as the search for all proofs of a formula (proof enumeration). This thesis is an investigation into issues in proof search in both these senses for some non-classical logics. Gentzen systems are well suited for use in proof search in both senses. The rules of Gentzen sequent calculi are such that implementations can be directed by the top level syntax of sequents, unlike other logical calculi such as natural deduction. All the calculi for proof search in this thesis are Gentzen sequent calculi. In Chapter 2, permutation of inference rules for Intuitionistic Linear Logic is studied. A focusing calculus, ILLF, in the style of Andreoli ([And92]) is developed.This calculus allows only one proof in each equivalence class of proofs equivalent up to permutations of inferences. The issue here is both theorem proving and proof enumeration. For certain logics, normal natural deductions provide a proof-theoretic semantics. Proof enumeration is then the enumeration of all these deductions. Herbelin’s cutfree LJT ([Her95], here called MJ) is a Gentzen system for intuitionistic logic allowing derivations that correspond in a 1–1 way to the normal natural deductions of intuitionistic logic. This calculus is therefore well suited to proof enumeration. Such calculi are called ‘permutation-free’ calculi. In Chapter 3, MJ is extended to a calculus for an intuitionistic modal logic (due to Curry) called Lax Logic. We call this calculus PFLAX. The proof theory of MJ is extended to PFLAX. Chapter 4 presents work on theorem proving for propositional logics using a history mechanism for loop-checking. This mechanism is a refinement of one developed by Heuerding et al ([HSZ96]). It is applied to two calculi for intuitionistic logic and also to two modal logics: Lax Logic and intuitionistic S4. The calculi for intuitionistic logic are compared both theoretically and experimentally with other decision procedures for the logic. Chapter 5 is a short investigation of embedding intuitionistic logic in Intuitionistic Linear Logic. A new embedding of intuitionistic logic in Intuitionistic Linear Logic is given. For the hereditary Harrop fragment of intuitionistic logic, this embedding induces the calculus MJ for intuitionistic logic. In Chapter 6 a ‘permutation-free’ calculus is given for Intuitionistic Linear Logic. Again, its proof-theoretic properties are investigated. The calculus is proved to besound and complete with respect to a proof-theoretic semantics and (weak) cutelimination is proved. Logic programming can be thought of as proof enumeration in constructive logics. All the proof enumeration calculi in this thesis have been developed with logic programming in mind. We discuss at the appropriate points the relationship between the calculi developed here and logic programming. Appendix A contains presentations of the logical calculi used and Appendix B contains the sets of benchmark formulae used in Chapter

Permutability in proof terms for intuitionistic sequent calculus with cuts

This paper gives a comprehensive and coherent view on permutability in the intuitionistic sequent calculus with cuts. Specifically we show that, once permutability is packaged into appropriate global reduction procedures, it organizes the internal structure of the system and determines fragments with computational interest, both for the computation-as-proof-normalization and the computation-as-proof-search paradigms. The vehicle of the study is a lambda-calculus of multiary proof terms with generalized application, previously developed by the authors (the paper argues this system represents the simplest fragment of ordinary sequent calculus that does not fall into mere natural deduction). We start by adapting to our setting the concept of normal proof, developed by Mints, Dyckhoff, and Pinto, and by defining natural proofs, so that a proof is normal iff it is natural and cut-free. Natural proofs form a subsystem with a transparent Curry-Howard interpretation (a kind of formal vector notation for lambda-terms with vectors consisting of lists of lists of arguments), while searching for normal proofs corresponds to a slight relaxation of focusing (in the sense of LJT). Next, we define a process of permutative conversion to natural form, and show that its combination with cut elimination gives a concept of normalization for the sequent calculus. We derive a systematic picture of the full system comprehending a rich set of reduction procedures (cut elimination, flattening, permutative conversion, normalization, focalization), organizing the relevant subsystems and the important subclasses of cut-free, normal, and focused proofs.Partially financed by FCT through project UID/MAT/00013/2013, and by COST action CA15123 EUTYPES. The first and the last authors were partially financed by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) through project UID/MAT/00013/2013. The first author got financial support by the COST action CA15123 EUTYPES.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Proof search in constructive logics

We present an overview of some sequent calculi organised not for "theorem-proving" but for proof search, where the proofs themselves (and the avoidance of known proofs on backtracking) are objects of interest. The main calculus discussed is that of Herbelin [1994] for intuitionistic logic, which extends methods used in hereditary Harrop logic programming; we give a brief discussion of similar calculi for other logics. We also point out to some related work on permutations in intuitionistic Gentzen sequent calculi that clarifies the relationship between such calculi and natural deduction.Centro de Matemática da Universidade do Minho (CMAT).União Europeia (UE) - Programa ESPRIT - BRA 7232 Gentzen

Proof Search Issues in Some Non-Classical Logics

This thesis develops techniques and ideas on proof search. Proof search is used with one of two meanings. Proof search can be thought of either as the search for a yes/no answer to a query (theorem proving), or as the search for all proofs of a formula (proof enumeration). This thesis is an investigation into issues in proof search in both these senses for some non-classical logics. Gentzen systems are well suited for use in proof search in both senses. The rules of Gentzen sequent calculi are such that implementations can be directed by the top level syntax of sequents, unlike other logical calculi such as natural deduction. All the calculi for proof search in this thesis are Gentzen sequent calculi. In Chapter 2, permutation of inference rules for Intuitionistic Linear Logic is studied. A focusing calculus, ILLF, in the style of Andreoli (citeandreoli-92) is developed. This calculus allows only one proof in each equivalence class of proofs equivalent up to permutations of inferences. The issue here is both theorem proving and proof enumeration. For certain logics, normal natural deductions provide a proof-theoretic semantics. Proof enumeration is then the enumeration of all these deductions. Herbelin's cut-free LJT (citeherb-95, here called MJ) is a Gentzen system for intuitionistic logic allowing derivations that correspond in a 1--1 way to the normal natural deductions of intuitionistic logic. This calculus is therefore well suited to proof enumeration. Such calculi are called `permutation-free' calculi. In Chapter 3, MJ is extended to a calculus for an intuitionistic modal logic (due to Curry) called Lax Logic. We call this calculus PFLAX. The proof theory of MJ is extended to PFLAX. Chapter 4 presents work on theorem proving for propositional logics using a history mechanism for loop-checking. This mechanism is a refinement of one developed by Heuerding emphet al (citeheu-sey-zim-96). It is applied to two calculi for intuitionistic logic and also to two modal logics: Lax Logic and intuitionistic S4. The calculi for intuitionistic logic are compared both theoretically and experimentally with other decision procedures for the logic. Chapter 5 is a short investigation of embedding intuitionistic logic in Intuitionistic Linear Logic. A new embedding of intuitionistic logic in Intuitionistic Linear Logic is given. For the hereditary Harrop fragment of intuitionistic logic, this embedding induces the calculus MJ for intuitionistic logic. In Chapter 6 a `permutation-free' calculus is given for Intuitionistic Linear Logic. Again, its proof-theoretic properties are investigated. The calculus is proved to be sound and complete with respect to a proof-theoretic semantics and (weak) cut-elimination is proved. Logic programming can be thought of as proof enumeration in constructive logics. All the proof enumeration calculi in this thesis have been developed with logic programming in mind. We discuss at the appropriate points the relationship between the calculi developed here and logic programming. Appendix A contains presentations of the logical calculi used and Appendix B contains the sets of benchmark formulae used in Chapter 4

Correspondences between Classical, Intuitionistic and Uniform Provability

Based on an analysis of the inference rules used, we provide a characterization of the situations in which classical provability entails intuitionistic provability. We then examine the relationship of these derivability notions to uniform provability, a restriction of intuitionistic provability that embodies a special form of goal-directedness. We determine, first, the circumstances in which the former relations imply the latter. Using this result, we identify the richest versions of the so-called abstract logic programming languages in classical and intuitionistic logic. We then study the reduction of classical and, derivatively, intuitionistic provability to uniform provability via the addition to the assumption set of the negation of the formula to be proved. Our focus here is on understanding the situations in which this reduction is achieved. However, our discussions indicate the structure of a proof procedure based on the reduction, a matter also considered explicitly elsewhere.Comment: 31 page

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

Polarizing Double Negation Translations

Double-negation translations are used to encode and decode classical proofs in intuitionistic logic. We show that, in the cut-free fragment, we can simplify the translations and introduce fewer negations. To achieve this, we consider the polarization of the formul{\ae}{} and adapt those translation to the different connectives and quantifiers. We show that the embedding results still hold, using a customized version of the focused classical sequent calculus. We also prove the latter equivalent to more usual versions of the sequent calculus. This polarization process allows lighter embeddings, and sheds some light on the relationship between intuitionistic and classical connectives

Focusing and Polarization in Intuitionistic Logic

A focused proof system provides a normal form to cut-free proofs that structures the application of invertible and non-invertible inference rules. The focused proof system of Andreoli for linear logic has been applied to both the proof search and the proof normalization approaches to computation. Various proof systems in literature exhibit characteristics of focusing to one degree or another. We present a new, focused proof system for intuitionistic logic, called LJF, and show how other proof systems can be mapped into the new system by inserting logical connectives that prematurely stop focusing. We also use LJF to design a focused proof system for classical logic. Our approach to the design and analysis of these systems is based on the completeness of focusing in linear logic and on the notion of polarity that appears in Girard's LC and LU proof systems