Standard Sequent Research Articles

Frege Systems for Quantified Boolean Logic

We define and investigate Frege systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). For these new proof systems, we develop a lower bound technique that directly lifts circuit lower bounds for a circuit class C to the QBF Frege system operating with lines from C . Such a direct transfer from circuit to proof complexity lower bounds has often been postulated for propositional systems but had not been formally established in such generality for any proof systems prior to this work. This leads to strong lower bounds for restricted versions of QBF Frege, in particular an exponential lower bound for QBF Frege systems operating with AC 0 [ p ] circuits. In contrast, any non-trivial lower bound for propositional AC 0 [ p ]-Frege constitutes a major open problem. Improving these lower bounds to unrestricted QBF Frege tightly corresponds to the major problems in circuit complexity and propositional proof complexity. In particular, proving a lower bound for QBF Frege systems operating with arbitrary P/poly circuits is equivalent to either showing a lower bound for P/poly or for propositional extended Frege (which operates with P/poly circuits). We also compare our new QBF Frege systems to standard sequent calculi for QBF and establish a correspondence to intuitionistic bounded arithmetic.

Logical argumentation by dynamic proof systems

In this paper we provide a proof theoretical investigation of logical argumentation, where arguments are represented by sequents, conflicts between arguments are represented by sequent elimination rules, and deductions are made by dynamic proof systems extending standard sequent calculi. The idea is to imitate argumentative movements in which certain claims are introduced or withdrawn in the presence of counter-claims. This is done by a dynamic evaluation of sequences of sequents, in which the latter are considered ‘derived’ or ‘not derived’ according to the content of the sequence. We show that decisive conclusions of such a process correspond to well-accepted consequences of the underlying argumentation framework. The outcome is therefore a general and modular proof-theoretical approach for paraconsistent and non-monotonic reasoning with argumentation systems.

Non-classical Elegance for Sequent Calculus Enthusiasts

In this paper we develop what we can describe as a "dual two-sided" cut-free sequent calculus system for the non-classical logics of truth lp, k 3, stt and a non-reflexive logic ts which is, arguably, more elegant than the three-sided sequent calculus developed by Ripley (The Review of Symbolic Logic 5:354---378, 2012) for the same logics. Its elegance stems from how it employs more or less the standard sequent calculus rules for the various connectives and truth, and the fact that it offers a rather neat connection between derivable sequents and validity in comparison to the calculus developed by Ripley (The Review of Symbolic Logic 5:354---378, 2012).

Deductive Argumentation by Enhanced Sequent Calculi and Dynamic Derivations

Logic-based approaches for analyzing and evaluating arguments have been largely studied in recent years, yielding a variety of formal methods for argumentation-based reasoning. The goal of this paper is to provide an abstract, proof theoretical investigation of logical argumentation, where arguments are represented by sequents, conflicts between arguments are represented by sequent elimination rules, and deductions are made by dynamic proof systems extending standard sequent calculi.

Simple cut elimination proof for hybrid logic

In the paper we present a relatively simple proof of cut elimination theorem for variety of hybrid logics in the language with satisfaction operators and universal modality. The proof is based on the strategy introduced originally in the framework of hypersequent calculi but it works well also for standard sequent calculi. Sequent calculus examined in the paper works on so called satisfaction formulae and cover all logics adequate with respect to classes of frames defined by so called geometric conditions.

LINEAR TIME IN HYPERSEQUENT FRAMEWORK

AbstractHypersequent calculus (HC), developed by A. Avron, is one of the most interesting proof systems suitable for nonclassical logics. Although HC has rather simple form, it increases significantly the expressive power of standard sequent calculi (SC). In particular, HC proved to be very useful in the field of proof theory of various nonclassical logics. It may seem surprising that it was not applied to temporal logics so far. In what follows, we discuss different approaches to formalization of logics of linear frames and provide a cut-free HC formalization ofKt4.3, the minimal temporal logic of linear frames, and some of its extensions. The novelty of our approach is that hypersequents are defined not as finite (multi)sets but as finite lists of ordinary sequents. Such a solution allows both linearity of time flow, and symmetry of past and future, to be incorporated by means of six temporal rules (three for future-necessity and three dual rules for past-necessity). Extensions of the basic calculus with simple structural rules cover logics of serial and dense frames. Completeness is proved by Schütte/Hintikka-style argument using models built from saturated hypersequents.

Focused Linear Logic and the λ-calculus

Linear logic enjoys strong symmetries inherited from classical logic while providing a constructive framework comparable to intuitionistic logic. However, the computational interpretation of sequent calculus presentations of linear logic remains problematic, mostly because of the many rule permutations allowed in the sequent calculus. We address this problem by providing a simple interpretation of focused proofs, a complete subclass of linear sequent proofs known to have a much stronger structure than the standard sequent calculus for linear logic. Despite the classical setting, the interpretation relates proofs to a refined linear λ-calculus, and we investigate its properties and relation to other calculi, such as the usual λ-calculus, the λμ-calculus, and their variants based on sequent calculi.

Hypersequent Calculi for S5: The Methods of Cut Elimination

S5 is one of the most important modal logic with nice syntactic, semantic and algebraic properties. In spite of that, a successful (i.e. cut-free) formalization of S5 on the ground of standard sequent calculus (SC) was problematic and led to the invention of numerous nonstandard, generalized forms of SC. One of the most interesting framework which was very often used for this aim is that of hypersequent calculi (HC). The paper is a survey of HC for S5 proposed by Pottinger, Avron, Restall, Poggiolesi, Lahav and Kurokawa. We are particularly interested in examining different methods which were used for proving the eliminability/admissibility of cut in these systems and present our own variant of a system which admits relatively simple proof of cut elimination.

Linear logic propositions as session types

Throughout the years, several typing disciplines for the π-calculus have been proposed. Arguably, the most widespread of these typing disciplines consists of session types. Session types describe the input/output behaviour of processes and traditionally provide strong guarantees about this behaviour (i.e. deadlock-freedom and fidelity). While these systems exploit a fundamental notion of linearity, the precise connection between linear logic and session types has not been well understood.This paper proposes a type system for the π-calculus that corresponds to a standard sequent calculus presentation of intuitionistic linear logic, interpreting linear propositions as session types and thus providing a purely logical account of all key features and properties of session types. We show the deep correspondence between linear logic and session types by exhibiting a tight operational correspondence between cut-elimination steps and process reductions. We also discuss an alternative presentation of linear session types based on classical linear logic, and compare our development with other more traditional session type systems.

Bunched Logics Displayed

We formulate a unified display calculus proof theory for the four principal varieties of bunched logic by combining display calculi for their component logics. Our calculi satisfy cut-elimination, and are sound and complete with respect to their standard presentations. We show how to constrain applications of display-equivalence in our calculi in such a way that an exhaustive proof search need be only finitely branching, and establish a full deduction theorem for the bunched logics with classical additives, BBI and CBI. We also show that the standard sequent calculus for BI can be seen as a reformulation of its display calculus, and argue that analogous sequent calculi for the other varieties of bunched logic are very unlikely to exist.

A Unified Display Proof Theory for Bunched Logic

We formulate a unified display calculus proof theory for the four principal varieties of bunched logic by combining display calculi for their component logics. Our calculi satisfy cut-elimination, and are sound and complete with respect to their standard presentations. We show that the standard sequent calculus for BI can be seen as a reformulation of its display calculus, and argue that analogous sequent calculi for the other varieties of bunched logic seem very unlikely to exist.

Contraction-free Proofs and Finitary Games for Linear Logic

In the standard sequent presentations of Girard's Linear Logic [Girard, J.-Y., Linear logic , Theoretical Computer Science 50 (1987), pp. 1–102] (LL), there are two “non-decreasing” rules, where the premises are not smaller than the conclusion, namely the cut and the contraction rules. It is a universal concern to eliminate the cut rule. We show that, using an admissible modification of the tensor rule, contractions can be eliminated, and that cuts can be simultaneously limited to a single initial occurrence. This view leads to a consistent, but incomplete game model for LL with exponentials, which is finitary , in the sense that each play is finite. The game is based on a set of inference rules which does not enjoy cut elimination. Nevertheless, the cut rule is valid in the model.

On contraction and the modal fragment

AbstractWe observe that removing contraction from a standard sequent calculus for first‐order predicate logic preserves completeness for the modal fragment. (© 2008 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

Indexed systems of sequents and cut-elimination

Cut reductions are defined for a Kripke-style formulation of modal logic in terms of indexed systems of sequents. A detailed proof of the normalization (cut-elimination) theorem is given. The proof is uniform for the propositional modal systems with all combinations of reflexivity, symmetry and transitivity for the accessibility relation. Some new transformations of derivations (compared to standard sequent formulations) are needed, and some additional properties are to be checked. The display formulations of the systems considered can be presented as encodings of Kripke-style formulations.