Proof-theoretic Semantics Research Articles

Notions of Proof and Refutation in ‘Gentzensemantik’: Franz von Kutschera as an Early Proponent of (Bilateralist) Proof-Theoretic Semantics

This is a comment on a translation of Franz von Kutschera's paper ‘Ein verallgemeinerter Widerlegungsbegriff für Gentzenkalküle’, which was published in German in 1969. The paper is an important predecessor of what is nowadays called ‘proof-theoretic semantics’, which describes the view that the meaning of logical connectives is determined by the rules governing their use in a proof system. Von Kutschera adopts this view in this paper, and more specifically, a bilateralist view on this subject in that his aim is to give a general framework that provides generalized rule schemata for arbitrary connectives both for proving and refuting and to use this as a reference to prove completeness of certain systems of operators purely proof-theoretically. The main logical system in focus here has been shown to be equivalent to N4, Nelson's constructive logic with strong negation. In order to understand the translated paper better, a contextualizing comment is offered referring and relating it to a preceding paper by von Kutschera.

Meaning is Use: the Case of Propositional Identity

We study natural deduction systems for a fragment of intuitionistic logic with propositional identity from the point of view of proof-theoretic semantics. We argue that the identity connective is a natural operator to be treated under the elimination rules as basic approach.

Categorical Proof-theoretic Semantics

AbstractIn proof-theoretic semantics, model-theoretic validity is replaced by proof-theoretic validity. Validity of formulae is defined inductively from a base giving the validity of atoms using inductive clauses derived from proof-theoretic rules. A key aim is to show completeness of the proof rules without any requirement for formal models. Establishing this for propositional intuitionistic logic raises some technical and conceptual issues. We relate Sandqvist’s (complete) base-extension semantics of intuitionistic propositional logic to categorical proof theory in presheaves, reconstructing categorically the soundness and completeness arguments, thereby demonstrating the naturality of Sandqvist’s constructions. This naturality includes Sandqvist’s treatment of disjunction that is based on its second-order or elimination-rule presentation. These constructions embody not just validity, but certain forms of objects of justifications. This analysis is taken a step further by showing that from the perspective of validity, Sandqvist’s semantics can also be viewed as the natural disjunction in a category of sheaves.

Base-extension semantics for modal logic

Abstract In proof-theoretic semantics, meaning is based on inference. It may seen as the mathematical expression of the inferentialist interpretation of logic. Much recent work has focused on base-extension semantics, in which the validity of formulas is given by an inductive definition generated by provability in a ‘base’ of atomic rules. Base-extension semantics for classical and intuitionistic propositional logic have been explored by several authors. In this paper, we develop base-extension semantics for the classical propositional modal systems $K$, $KT$, $K4$ and $S4$, with $\square $ as the primary modal operator. We establish appropriate soundness and completeness theorems and establish the duality between $\square $ and a natural presentation of $\lozenge $. We also show that our semantics is in its current form not complete with respect to euclidean modal logics. Our formulation makes essential use of relational structures on bases.

MARTIN-LÖF’S TYPE THEORУ: BETWEEN PHENOMENOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL PHILOSOPHY

Martin-Löf’s type theory stems simultaneously from Frege and Russell’s logic-ontological ideas and Husserl’s phenomenology. The article examines this intermediate status of type theory using as examples Martin-Löf ’s syntactical-semantic method and the role of evidence and canonical objects in his approach. Martin-Löf borrows the syntactical-semantic method from Frege and extends it drawing on Husserl’s theory of meaning. In type theory this method leads to the identity (isomorphism) of syntax and semantics (formal logic and formal ontology). Unlike traditional formal logic the type theory is an interpreted system from the very beginning. Being intuitionistic, Martin-Löf ’s theory is based on the notion of proof, not truth. From the meaning theory point of view, it is a variant of proof-theoretic semantics (Gentzen, Prawitz, Dummett) which understands meaning as an object constructed according to certain rules. So understood, the proof is based on evidence, which allows us to associate it with the theory of intentionality by Husserl. The article compares Martin-Löf ’s type theory with Husserl’s intentionality theory, especially with the latter’s noematic component. We may consider type-theoretical rules for constructing objects and operating with them as a concretization and formalization of the phenomenological notion of noema. Both are explications of the more general concept of meaning. The article discusses the interrelation between notions of sense and meaning (Sinn, Bedeutung) in Frege, Husserl and Martin-Löf. This reveals the uncertainty of Martin-Löf ’s position in relation to meaning theories of Frege and Husserl.

Logical Multilateralism

In this paper we will consider the existing notions of bilateralism in the context of proof-theoretic semantics and propose, based on our understanding of bilateralism, an extension to logical multilateralism. This approach differs from what has been proposed under this name before in that we do not consider multiple speech acts as the core of such a theory but rather multiple consequence relations. We will argue that for this aim the most beneficial proof-theoretical realization is to use sequent calculi with multiple sequent arrows satisfying some specific conditions, which we will lay out in this paper. We will unfold our ideas with the help of a case study in logical tetralateralism and present an extension of Almukdad and Nelson’s propositional constructive four-valued logic by unary operations of meaningfulness and nonsensicality. We will argue that in sequent calculi with multiple sequent arrows it is possible to maintain certain features that are desirable if we assume an understanding of the meaning of connectives in the spirit of proof-theoretic semantics. The use of multiple sequent arrows will be justified by the presence of congruentiality-breaking unary connectives.

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 \(\mathbf{K}\), whose values lie in the closed interval \([0,1]\) of rational numbers [14]. In this paper, after clarifying our conception of bilateralism – dubbed “soft bilateralism” – we generalize the fractional method to encompass extensions and weakenings of \(\mathbf{K}\). Specifically, we introduce well-behaved hypersequent calculi for the deontic logic \(\mathbf{D}\) and the non-normal modal logics \(\mathbf{E}\) and \(\mathbf{M}\) and thoroughly investigate their structural properties.

Definite Formulae, Negation-as-Failure, and the Base-Extension Semantics of Intuitionistic Propositional Logic

Proof-theoretic semantics (P-tS) is the paradigm of semantics in which meaning in logic is based on proof (as opposed to truth). A particular instance of P-tS for intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL) is its base-extension semantics (B-eS). This semantics is given by a relation called support, explaining the meaning of the logical constants, which is parameterized by systems of rules called bases that provide the semantics of atomic propositions. In this paper, we interpret bases as collections of definite formulae and use the operational view of them as provided by uniform proof-search—the proof-theoretic foundation of logic programming (LP)—to establish the completeness of IPL for the B-eS. This perspective allows negation, a subtle issue in P-tS, to be understood in terms of the negation-as-failure protocol in LP. Specifically, while the denial of a proposition is traditionally understood as the assertion of its negation, in B-eS we may understand the denial of a proposition as the failure to find a proof of it. In this way, assertion and denial are both prime concepts in P-tS.

On Synonymy in Proof-Theoretic Semantics: The Case of \(\mathtt{2Int}\)

We consider an approach to propositional synonymy in proof-theoretic semantics that is defined with respect to a bilateral G3-style sequent calculus \(\mathtt{SC2Int}\) for the bi-intuitionistic logic \(\mathtt{2Int}\). A distinctive feature of \(\mathtt{SC2Int}\) is that it makes use of two kind of sequents, one representing proofs, the other representing refutations. The structural rules of \(\mathtt{SC2Int}\), in particular its cut rules, are shown to be admissible. Next, interaction rules are defined that allow transitions from proofs to refutations, and vice versa, mediated through two different negation connectives, the well-known implies-falsity negation and the less well-known coimplies-truth negation of \(\mathtt{2Int}\). By assuming that the interaction rules have no impact on the identity of derivations, the concept of inherited identity between derivations in \(\mathtt{SC2Int}\) is introduced and the notions of positive and negative synonymy of formulas are defined. Several examples are given of distinct formulas that are either positively or negatively synonymous. It is conjectured that the two conditions cannot be satisfied simultaneously.

Bilateral Rules as Complex Rules

Proof-theoretic semantics is an inferentialist theory of meaning originally developed in a unilateral framework. Its extension to bilateral systems opens both opportunities and problems. The problems are caused especially by Coordination Principles (a kind of rule that is not present in unilateral systems) and mismatches between rules for assertion and rules for rejection. In this paper, a solution is proposed for two major issues: the availability of a reduction procedure for tonk and the existence of harmonious rules for the paradoxical zero-ary connective \(\bullet\). The solution is based on a reinterpretation of bilateral rules as complex rules, that is, rules that introduce or eliminate connectives in a subordinate position. Looking at bilateral rules from this perspective, the problems faced by bilateralism can be seen as special cases of general problems of complex systems, which have been already analyzed in the literature. In the end, a comparison with other proposed solutions underlines the need for further investigation in order to complete the picture of bilateral proof-theoretic semantics.

Introduction: Bilateralism and Proof-Theoretic Semantics (Part I)

Introduction: Bilateralism and Proof-Theoretic Semantics (Part I)

Something Valid This Way Comes: A Study of Neologicism and Proof-Theoretic Validity

AbstractThe interplay of philosophical ambitions and technical reality have given birth to rich and interesting approaches to explain the oft-claimed special character of mathematical and logical knowledge. Two projects stand out both for their audacity and their innovativeness. These are logicism and proof-theoretic semantics. This dissertation contains three chapters exploring the limits of these two projects. In both cases I find the formal results offer a mixed blessing to the philosophical projects.Chapter 1. Is a logicist bound to the claim that as a matter of analytic truth there is an actual infinity of objects? If Hume’s Principle is analytic then in the standard setting the answer appears to be yes. Hodes’s work pointed to a way out by offering a modal picture in which only a potential infinity was posited. However, this project was abandoned due to apparent failures of cross-world predication. I re-explore this idea and discover that in the setting of the potential infinite one can interpret first-order Peano arithmetic, but not second-order Peano arithmetic. I conclude that in order for the logicist to weaken the metaphysically loaded claim of necessary actual infinities, they must also weaken the mathematics they recover.Chapter 2. There have been several recent results bringing into focus the super-intuitionistic nature of most notions of proof-theoretic validity. But there has been very little work evaluating the consequences of these results. In this chapter, I explore the question of whether these results undermine the claim that proof-theoretic validity shows us which inferences follow from the meaning of the connectives when defined by their introduction rules. It is argued that the super-intuitionistic inferences are valid due to the correspondence between the treatment of the atomic formulas and more complex formulas. And so the goals of proof-theoretic validity are not undermined.Chapter 3. Prawitz (1971) conjectured that proof-theoretic validity offers a semantics for intuitionistic logic. This conjecture has recently been proven false by Piecha and Schroeder-Heister (2019). This chapter resolves one of the questions left open by this recent result by showing the extensional alignment of proof-theoretic validity and general inquisitive logic. General inquisitive logic is a generalisation of inquisitive semantics, a uniform semantics for questions and assertions. The chapter further defines a notion of quasi-proof-theoretic validity by restricting proof-theoretic validity to allow double negation elimination for atomic formulas and proves the extensional alignment of quasi-proof-theoretic validity and inquisitive logic.Abstract prepared by Will Stafford extracted partially from the dissertation.E-mail: stafford@flu.cas.czURL: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/33c6h00c

Kant’s Die falsche Spitzfindigkeit and Proof-theoretic Semantics

According to Schroeder-Heister 2018, proof-theoretic semantics is ‘an alternative to truth-condition semantics. It is based on the fundamental assumption that the central notion in terms of which meanings are assigned to certain expressions of our language, in particular to logical constants, is that of proof rather than truth. In this sense proof-theoretic semantics is semantics in terms of proof. Proof-theoretic semantics also means the semantics of proofs, i.e. the semantics of entities which describe how we arrive at certain assertions given certain assumptions.' This text advocates that proof-theoretic semantics, as described above, was an approach to semantical issues in logic that appeared in mainstream philosophical literature at least a couple of centuries before the tradition of general proof theory (cf. Prawitz 1971) came into being. This is done by means of an interpretive analysis of Kant’s 1762 essay Die falsche Spitzfindigkeit der vier syllogistischen Figuren, in which two theses are argued: first, that the issue of justifying the logical validity of inferences is approached by Kant in this text, in a strong sense, in terms of proofs; and second, that the purpose of his effort is to establish a point concerning the semantical equivalence between certain distinct valid inferences.

Proof-theoretic semantics as a resource for expressing semantic variability

Proof-theoretic semantics as a resource for expressing semantic variability

Contraction-Free Logics and the Idea of an Intensional Proof-Theoretic Semantics

Contraction-Free Logics and the Idea of an Intensional Proof-Theoretic Semantics

Proof Theory of Skew Non-Commutative MILL

Monoidal closed categories naturally model NMILL, non-commutative multiplicative intuitionistic linear logic: the monoidal unit and tensor interpret the multiplicative verum and conjunction; the internal hom interprets linear implication. In recent years, the weaker notion of (left) skew monoidal closed category has been proposed by Ross Street, where the three structural laws of left and right unitality and associativity are not required to be invertible, they are merely natural transformations with a specific orientation. A question arises: is it possible to find a logic which is naturally modelled by skew monoidal closed categories? We answer positively by introducing a cut-free sequent calculus for a skew version of NMILL that is a presentation of the free skew monoidal closed category. We study the proof-theoretic semantics of the sequent calculus by identifying a calculus of derivations in normal form, obtained from an adaptation of Andreoli's focusing technique to the skew setting. The resulting focused sequent calculus peculiarly employs a system of tags for keeping track of new formulae appearing in the antecedent and appropriately reducing non-deterministic choices in proof search. Focusing solves the coherence problem for skew monoidal closed categories by exhibiting an effective procedure for deciding equality of maps in the free such category.

Harmony in the Light of Computational Ludics

Prawitz formulated the so-called inversion principle as one of the characteristic features of Gentzen's intuitionistic natural deduction. In the literature on proof-theoretic semantics, this principle is often coupled with another that is called the recovery principle. By adopting the Computational Ludics framework, we reformulate these principles into one and the same condition, which we call the harmony condition. We show that this reformulation allows us to reveal two intuitive ideas standing behind these principles: the idea of "containment" present in the inversion principle, and the idea that the recovery principle is the "converse" of the inversion principle. We also formulate two other conditions in the Computational Ludics framework, and we show that each of them is equivalent to the harmony condition.

FRACTIONAL-VALUED MODAL LOGIC

AbstractThis 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.

SUBATOMIC INFERENCES: AN INFERENTIALIST SEMANTICS FOR ATOMICS, PREDICATES, AND NAMES

AbstractInferentialism is a theory in the philosophy of language which claims that the meanings of expressions are constituted by inferential roles or relations. Instead of a traditional model-theoretic semantics, it naturally lends itself to a proof-theoretic semantics, where meaning is understood in terms of inference rules with a proof system. Most work in proof-theoretic semantics has focused on logical constants, with comparatively little work on the semantics of non-logical vocabulary. Drawing on Robert Brandom’s notion of material inference and Greg Restall’s bilateralist interpretation of the multiple conclusion sequent calculus, I present a proof-theoretic semantics for atomic sentences and their constituent names and predicates. The resulting system has several interesting features: (1) the rules are harmonious and stable; (2) the rules create a structure analogous to familiar model-theoretic semantics; and (3) the semantics is compositional, in that the rules for atomic sentences are determined by those for their constituent names and predicates.

Essence As A Modality: A Proof-Theoretic and Nominalist Analysis

Inquiry into the metaphysics of essence tends to be pursued in a realist and model-theoretic spirit, in the sense that metaphysical vocabulary is used in a metalanguage to model truth conditions for the object-language use of essentialist vocabulary. This essay adapts recent developments in proof-theoretic semantics to provide a nominalist analysis for a variety of essentialist vocabularies. A metalanguage employing explanatory inferences is used to individuate introduction and elimination rules for atomic sentences. The object-language assertions of sentences concerning essences are then interpreted as devices for marking off structural features of the explanatory inferences that, under a given interpretation, constitute the contents of the atoms of the language. On this proposal, object-language essentialist vocabulary is mentioned in a proof-theoretic metalanguage that uses a vocabulary of explanation. The result is a nominalist interpretation of essence as a modality, understood in the grammatical sense as a modification of the copula, and a view of metaphysical inquiry that is closely connected to the explanatory commitments present in first-order inquiry into things like sets, chemicals, and organisms. This result illustrates that some of the presuppositions that have animated analytic metaphysics over the last few decades can be profitably substituted with more practice-oriented conceptions of the forms of reasoning at work in different domains of human knowledge.