Combinatorial Flows and Their Normalisation

This paper introduces combinatorial flows that generalize combinatorial proofs such that they also include cut and substitution as methods of proof compression. We show a normalization procedure for combinatorial flows, and how syntactic proofs are translated into combinatorial flows and vice versa

What is a logic, and what is a proof ?

International audienceI will discuss the two problems of how to define identity between logics and how to define identity between proofs. For the identity of logics, I propose to simply use the notion of preorder equivalence. This might be considered to be folklore, but is exactly what is needed from the viewpoint of the problem of the identity of proofs: If the proofs are considered to be part of the logic, then preorder equivalence becomes equivalence of categories, whose arrows are the proofs. For identifying these, the concept of proof nets is discussed

Proof Transformation with Built-in Equality Predicate

One of the main reasons why computer generated proofs are not widely accepted is often their complexity and incomprehensibility. Especially proofs of mathematical theorems with equations are normally presented in an inadequate and not intuitive way. This is even more of a problem for the presentation of inferences drawn by automated reasoning components in other AI systems. For first order logic, proof transformation procedures have been designed in order to structure proofs and state them in a formalism that is more familiar to human mathematicians. In this report we generalize these approaches, so that proofs involving equational reasoning can also be handled. To this end extended refutation graphs are introduced to represent combined resolution and paramodulation proofs. In the process of transforming these proofs into natural deduction proofs with equality, the inherent structure can also be extracted by exploiting topological properties of refutation graphs

Conflict nets:efficient locally canonical MALL proof nets

Proof nets for MLL (unit-free multiplicative linear logic) and (unit-free additive linear logic) are graphical abstractions of proofs which are efficient (proofs translate in linear time) and canoni- cal (invariant under rule commutation). This paper solves a three- decade open problem: are there efficient canonical proof nets for MALL (unit-free multiplicative-additive linear logic)?Honouring MLL and ALL canonicity, in which all commutations are strictly local proof-tree rewrites, we define local canonicity for MALL: invariance under local rule commutation. We present new proof nets for MALL, called conflict nets, which are both efficient and locally canonical

Fleuves combinatoires et compression des preuves

This paper introduces the notion of combinatorial flows as a generalization of combinatorial proofs that also includes cut and substitution as methods of proof compression. We show a normalization procedure for combinatorial flows, and how syntactic proofs in sequent calculus, deep inference, andFrege systems are translated into combinatorial flows and vice versa.Cet article introduit la notion de fleuves combinatoires comme généralisation des preuves combinatoiresqui comprend également la coupure et la substitution comme méthodes de compression des preuves. Nous montronsun procédure de normalisation des fleuves combinatoires, et la traduction entre les preuves syntactiques du calcul deséquents, de l’inférence profonde, des systèmes de Frege, et les fleuves combinatoires

Computational Aspects of Proofs in Modal Logic

Various modal logics seem well suited for developing models of knowledge, belief, time, change, causality, and other intensional concepts. Most such systems are related to the classical Lewis systems, and thereby have a substantial body of conventional proof theoretical results. However, most of the applied literature examines modal logics from a semantical point of view, rather than through proof theory. It appears arguments for validity are more clearly stated in terms of a semantical explanation, rather than a classical proof-theoretic one. We feel this is due to the inability of classical proof theories to adequately represent intensional aspects of modal semantics. This thesis develops proof theoretical methods which explicitly represent the underlying semantics of the modal formula in the proof. We initially develop a Gentzen style proof system which contains semantic information in the sequents. This system is, in turn, used to develop natural deduction proofs. Another semantic style proof representation, the modal expansion tree is developed. This structure can be used to derive either Gentzen style or Natural Deduction proofs. We then explore ways of automatically generating MET proofs, and prove sound and complete heuristics for that procedure. These results can be extended to most propositional system using a Kripke style semantics and a fist order theory of the possible worlds relation. Examples are presented for standard T, S4, and S5 systems, systems of knowledge and belief, and common knowledge. A computer program which implements the theory is briefly examined in the appendix

On the Axiomatisation of Boolean Categories with and without Medial

In its most general meaning, a Boolean category is to categories what a Boolean algebra is to posets. In a more specific meaning a Boolean category should provide the abstract algebraic structure underlying the proofs in Boolean Logic, in the same sense as a Cartesian closed category captures the proofs in intuitionistic logic and a *-autonomous category captures the proofs in linear logic. However, recent work has shown that there is no canonical axiomatisation of a Boolean category. In this work, we will see a series (with increasing strength) of possible such axiomatisations, all based on the notion of *-autonomous category. We will particularly focus on the medial map, which has its origin in an inference rule in KS, a cut-free deductive system for Boolean logic in the calculus of structures. Finally, we will present a category proof nets as a particularly well-behaved example of a Boolean category

Resolution Proof Technique in Linear Temporal Logic.

This dissertation presents a resolution proof technique for Propositional Linear Temporal Logic of discrete time with the Until operator. The presented proof technique stems from the resolution method developed by L. Farinas del Cerro and A. Cavalli. However, their method is incomplete, and their completeness proof, as originally reported, is incorrect. Unlike Farinas\u27s method, our proof technique incorporated the Until operator, which is a very powerful and useful in describing complex temporal relationships which are common in many areas of computer science. Our technique is also proved complete. The presented resolution method for linear temporal logic is similar to classical resolutions: the main goal is to show unsatisfiability of a set of temporal clauses by locating, either directly or indirectly, a state which contains unsatisfiability. Subsequent resolvents of a refutation are obtained by resolving out complementary literals referring to the same instant of time. In order to increase the efficiency of the resolution proof technique, we have developed a refinement of the presented basic method. This refinement is similar to the well-known Ordered Linear (OL) strategy for classical resolution. We also present the lifting of the basic resolution method to predicate linear temporal logic. Unlike First Order Logic, clauses of predicate linear temporal logic may contain variables which are quantified existentially, because skolemization is not valid here. We use standard unification with substitution on universally quantified variables. However, if a term substituted in place of a variable contains any flexible symbols, a constant or a function is flexible if it has different translation in different states, then all occurrences of the substituted variable must refer to the same instant of time (state). Otherwise, the unification may lead to incorrect results. Resolution in predicate linear temporal logic, though very useful from a practical standpoint, is incomplete, since no predicate temporal logic with arithmetic model of time is complete