Through and beyond classicality: analyticity, embeddings, infinity

Structural proof theory deals with formal representation of proofs and with the investigation of their properties. This thesis provides an analysis of various non-classical logical systems using proof-theoretic methods. The approach consists in the formulation of analytic calculi for these logics which are then used in order to study their metalogical properties. A specific attention is devoted to studying the connections between classical and non-classical reasoning. In particular, the use of analytic sequent calculi allows one to regain desirable structural properties which are lost in non-classical contexts. In this sense, proof-theoretic versions of embeddings between non-classical logics - both finitary and infinitary - prove to be a useful tool insofar as they build a bridge between different logical regions

On the proof theory of infinitary modal logic

The article deals with infinitary modal logic. We first discuss the difficulties related to the development of a satisfactory proof theory and then we show how to overcome these problems by introducing a labelled sequent calculus which is sound and complete with respect to Kripke semantics. We establish the structural properties of the system, namely admissibility of the structural rules and of the cut rule. Finally, we show how to embed common knowledge in the infinitary calculus and we discuss first-order extensions of infinitary modal logic

Labelled sequent calculi for logics of strict implication

n this paper we study the proof theory of C.I. Lewis’ logics of strict conditional S1- S5 and we propose the first modular and uniform presentation of C.I. Lewis’ systems. In particular, for each logic Sn we present a labelled sequent calculus G3Sn and we discuss its structural properties: every rule is height-preserving invertible and the structural rules of weakening, contraction and cut are admissible. Completeness of G3Sn is established both indirectly via the embedding in the axiomatic system Sn and directly via the extraction of a countermodel out of a failed proof search. Finally, the sequent calculus G3S1 is employed to obtain a syntactic proof of decidability of S1

Fractional-valued modal logic

This paper is dedicated to extending and adapting to modal logic the approach of fractional semantics to classical logic. This is a multi-valued semantics governed by pure proof-theoretic considerations, whose truth-values are the rational numbers in the closed interval [0,1] . Focusing on the modal logic K, the proposed methodology relies on three key components: bilateral sequent calculus, invertibility of the logical rules, and stability (proof-invariance). We show that our semantic analysis of K affords an informational refinement with respect to the standard Kripkean semantics (a new proof of Dugundji’s theorem is a case in point) and it raises the prospect of a proof-theoretic semantics for modal logic

Fractional-valued modal logic and soft bilateralism

In a recent paper, under the auspices of an unorthodox variety of bilateralism, we introduced a new kind of proof-theoretic semantics for the base modal logic K, whose values lie in the closed interval [0, 1] of rational numbers. In this paper, after clarifying our conception of bilateralism – dubbed “soft bilateralism” – we generalize the fractional method to encompass extensions and weakenings of K. Specifically, we introduce well-behaved hypersequent calculi for the deontic logic D and the non-normal modal logics E and M and thoroughly investigate their structural properties

Non-contractive logics, paradoxes, and multiplicative quantifiers

The paper investigates from a proof-theoretic perspective various non-contractive logical systems, which circumvent logical and semantic paradoxes. Until recently, such systems only displayed additive quantifiers (Grišin and Cantini). Systems with multiplicative quantifiers were proposed in the 2010s (Zardini), but they turned out to be inconsistent with the naive rules for truth or comprehension. We start by presenting a first-order system for disquotational truth with additive quantifiers and compare it with Grišin set theory. We then analyze the reasons behind the inconsistency phenomenon affecting multiplicative quantifiers. After interpreting the exponentials in affine logic as vacuous quantifiers, we show how such a logic can be simulated within a truth-free fragment of a system with multiplicative quantifiers. Finally, we establish that the logic for these multiplicative quantifiers (but without disquotational truth) is consistent, by proving that an infinitary version of the cut rule can be eliminated. This paves the way to a syntactic approach to the proof theory of infinitary logic with infinite sequents

Taming Bounded Depth with Nested Sequents

International audienceBounded depth refers to a property of Kripke frames that serve as semantics for intuitionistic logic. We introduce nested sequent calculi for the intermediate logics of bounded depth. Our calculi are obtained in a modular way by adding suitable structural rules to a variant of Fitting's calculus for intuitionistic propositional logic, for which we present the first syntactic cut elimination proof. This proof modularly extends to the new nested sequent calculi introduced in this paper