Subformula Property Research Articles

Uniform Cut-Free Bisequent Calculi for Three-Valued Logics

We present a uniform characterisation of three-valued logics by means of a bisequent calculus (BSC). It is a generalised form of a sequent calculus (SC) where rules operate on the ordered pairs of ordinary sequents. BSC may be treated as the weakest kind of system in the rich family of generalised SC operating on items being some collections of ordinary sequents, like hypersequent and nested sequent calculi. It seems that for many non-classical logics, including some many-valued, paraconsistent and modal logics, the reasonably modest generalisation of standard SC offered by BSC is sufficient. In this paper, we examine a variety of three-valued logics and show how they can be formalised in the framework of BSC. We present a constructive syntactic proof that these systems are cut-free, satisfy the subformula property, and allow one to prove the interpolation theorem in many cases.

Analyticity with extra-logical information

Abstract In this paper, a new approach to the issue of extra-logical information within analytic (i.e. obeying the sub-formula property) sequent systems is introduced. We prove that incorporating extra-logical axioms into a purely logical system can preserve analyticity, provided these axioms belong to a suitable class of formulas that can be decomposed into a set of equivalent initial sequents and are permutable over the cut rule. Our approach is applicable not only to first-order classical and intuitionistic logics, but also to substructural logics. Furthermore, we establish a limit for the augmented systems under analysis: exceeding the boundaries of their respective classes of extra-logical axioms leads to either a loss of analyticity or a loss of structural properties.

Orthologic with Axioms

We study the proof theory and algorithms for orthologic, a logical system based on ortholattices, which have shown practical relevance in simplification and normalization of verification conditions. Ortholattices weaken Boolean algebras while having polynomial-time equivalence checking that is sound with respect to Boolean algebra semantics. We generalize ortholattice reasoning and obtain an algorithm for proving a larger class of classically valid formulas. As the key result, we analyze a proof system for orthologic augmented with axioms. An important feature of the system is that it limits the number of formulas in a sequent to at most two, which makes the extension with axioms non-trivial. We show a generalized form of cut elimination for this system, which implies a sub-formula property. From there we derive a cubic-time algorithm for provability from axioms, or equivalently, for validity in finitely presented ortholattices. We further show that propositional resolution of width 5 proves all formulas provable in orthologic with axioms. We show that orthologic system subsumes resolution of width 2 and arbitrarily wide unit resolution and is complete for reasoning about generalizations of propositional Horn clauses. Moving beyond ground axioms, we introduce effectively propositional orthologic (by analogy with EPR for classical logic), presenting its semantics as well as a sound and complete proof system. Our proof system implies the decidability of effectively propositional orthologic, as well as its fixed-parameter tractability for a bounded maximal number of variables in each axiom. As a special case, we obtain a generalization of Datalog with negation and disjunction.

Bisequent Calculus for Four-Valued Quasi-Relevant Logics: Cut Elimination and Interpolation

We present a uniform syntactical characterisation of the class of quasi-relevant logics which are four-valued extensions of the basic relevant logic B of Meyer and Routley. All these logics are obtained by the addition of suitable quasi-relevant implications to the four-valued logic of First Degree Entailment FDE. So far they were characterised axiomatically and semantically in several ways but did not obtain a special proof-theoretic treatment. To this aim a generalised form of sequent calculus called bisequent calculus (BSC) is applied. In BSC rules operate on the ordered pairs of ordinary sequents. It may be treated as the weakest kind of system in the rich family of generalised sequent calculi operating on items which are some collections of ordinary sequents, like hypersequents or nested sequents. It is shown that all logics under consideration have cut-free characterisation in BSC which satisfies the subformula property and yields decidability. It is also shown that the interpolation theorem holds for these logics if their language is enriched with additional negation.

Is, Ought, and Cut

In this paper we use proof-theoretic methods, specifically sequent calculi, admissibility of cut within them and the resultant subformula property, to examine a range of philosophically-motivated deontic logics. We show that for all of those logics it is a (meta)theorem that the Special Hume Thesis holds, namely that no purely normative conclusion follows non-trivially from purely descriptive premises (nor vice versa). In addition to its interest on its own, this also illustrates one way in which proof theory sheds light on philosophically substantial questions.

Linear Logic Properly Displayed

We introduce proper display calculi for intuitionistic, bi-intuitionistic and classical linear logics with exponentials, which are sound, complete, conservative, and enjoy cut elimination and subformula property. Based on the same design, we introduce a variant of Lambek calculus with exponentials, aimed at capturing the controlled application of exchange and associativity. Properness (i.e., closure under uniform substitution of all parametric parts in rules) is the main technical novelty of the present proposal, allowing both for the smoothest proof of cut elimination and for the development of an overarching and modular treatment for a vast class of axiomatic extensions and expansions of intuitionistic, bi-intuitionistic, and classical linear logics with exponentials. Our proposal builds on an algebraic and order-theoretic analysis of linear logic and applies the guidelines of the multi-type methodology in the design of display calculi.

Linear Depth Deduction with Subformula Property for Intuitionistic Epistemic Logic

In their seminal paper Artemov and Protopopescu provide Hilbert formal systems, Brower–Heyting–Kolmogorov and Kripke semantics for the logics of intuitionistic belief and knowledge. Subsequently Krupski has proved that the logic of intuitionistic knowledge is PSPACE-complete and Su and Sano have provided calculi enjoying the subformula property. This paper continues the investigations around sequent calculi for Intuitionistic Epistemic Logics by providing sequent calculi that have the subformula property and that are terminating in linear depth. Our calculi allow us to design a procedure that for invalid formulas returns a Kripke model of minimal depth. Finally we also discuss refutational sequent calculi, that is sequent calculi to prove that formulas are invalid.

The Buridan-Volpin Derivation System; Properties and Justification

The Buridan-Volpin Derivation System; Properties and Justification

Syntactic Completeness of Proper Display Calculi

A recent strand of research in structural proof theory aims at exploring the notion of analytic calculi (i.e., those calculi that support general and modular proof-strategies for cut elimination) and at identifying classes of logics that can be captured in terms of these calculi. In this context, Wansing introduced the notion of proper display calculi as one possible design framework for proof calculi in which the analyticity desiderata are realized in a particularly transparent way. Recently, the theory of properly displayable logics (i.e., those logics that can be equivalently presented with some proper display calculus) has been developed in connection with generalized Sahlqvist theory (a.k.a. unified correspondence). Specifically, properly displayable logics have been syntactically characterized as those axiomatized by analytic inductive axioms , which can be equivalently and algorithmically transformed into analytic structural rules so the resulting proper display calculi enjoy a set of basic properties: soundness, completeness, conservativity, cut elimination, and the subformula property. In this context, the proof that the given calculus is complete w.r.t. the original logic is usually carried out syntactically , i.e., by showing that a (cut-free) derivation exists of each given axiom of the logic in the basic system to which the analytic structural rules algorithmically generated from the given axiom have been added. However, so far, this proof strategy for syntactic completeness has been implemented on a case-by-case base and not in general. In this article, we address this gap by proving syntactic completeness for properly displayable logics in any normal (distributive) lattice expansion signature. Specifically, we show that for every analytic inductive axiom a cut-free derivation can be effectively generated that has a specific shape, referred to as pre-normal form .

Combining First-Order Classical and Intuitionistic Logic

This paper studies a first-order expansion of a combination C+J of intuitionistic and classical propositional logic, which was studied by Humberstone (1979) and del Cerro and Herzig (1996), from a proof-theoretic viewpoint. While C+J has both classical and intuitionistic implications, our first-order expansion adds classical and intuitionistic universal quantifiers and one existential quantifier to C+J. This paper provides a multi-succedent sequent calculus G(FOC+J) for our combination of the first-order intuitionistic and classical logic. Our sequent calculus G(FOC+J) restricts contexts of the right rules for intuitionistic implication and intuitionistic universal quantifier to particular forms of formulas. The cut-elimination theorem is established to ensure the subformula property. As a corollary, G(FOC+J) is conservative over both first-order intuitionistic and classical logic. Strong completeness of G(FOC+J) is proved via a canonical model argument.

Decidability of Intuitionistic Sentential Logic with Identity via Sequent Calculus

The aim of our paper is twofold: firstly we present a sequent calculus for an intuitionistic non-Fregean logic ISCI, which is based on the calculus presented in the paper by Chlebowski and Leszczynska-Jasion, 'An Investigation into Intuitionistic Logic with Identity' (Bulletin of the Section of Logic 48(4), p. 259-283, 2019) and, secondly, we discuss the problem of decidability of ISCI via the obtained system. The original calculus from the mentioned paper did not provide the decidability result for ISCI. There are two problems to be solved in order to obtain this result: the so called loops characteristic for intuitionistic logic and the lack of the subformula property due to the form of the identity-dedicated rules. We discuss possible routes to overcome these problems: we consider a weaker version of the subformula property, guarded by the complexity of formulas which can be included within it; we also present a proof-search procedure such that when it fails, then there exists a countermodel (in Kripke semantics for ISCI).

Normalisation for Some Infectious Logics and Their Relatives

We consider certain infectious logics (Sfde, dSfde, K3w, and PWK) and several their non-infectious modifications, including two new logics, reformulate previously constructed natural deduction systems for them (or present such systems from scratch for the case of new logics) in way such that the proof of normalisation theorem becomes possible for these logics. We present such a proof and establish the negation subformula property for the logics in question.

Logical Foundations for Hybrid Type-Logical Grammars

This paper explores proof-theoretic aspects of hybrid type-logical grammars, a logic combining Lambek grammars with lambda grammars. We prove some basic properties of the calculus, such as normalisation and the subformula property and also present both a sequent and a proof net calculus for hybrid type-logical grammars. In addition to clarifying the logical foundations of hybrid type-logical grammars, the current study opens the way to variants and extensions of the original system, including but not limited to a non-associative version and a multimodal version incorporating structural rules and unary modes.

Normalisation and subformula property for a system of intuitionistic logic with general introduction and elimination rules

This paper studies a formalisation of intuitionistic logic by Negri and von Plato which has general introduction and elimination rules. The philosophical importance of the system is expounded. Definitions of ‘maximal formula’, ‘segment’ and ‘maximal segment’ suitable to the system are formulated and corresponding reduction procedures for maximal formulas and permutative reduction procedures for maximal segments given. Alternatives to the main method used are also considered. It is shown that deductions in the system convert into normal form and that deductions in normal form have the subformula property.

RUSSELLIAN DEFINITE DESCRIPTION THEORY—A PROOF THEORETIC APPROACH

AbstractThe paper provides a proof theoretic characterization of the Russellian theory of definite descriptions (RDD) as characterized by Kalish, Montague and Mar (KMM). To this effect three sequent calculi are introduced: LKID0, LKID1 and LKID2. LKID0 is an auxiliary system which is easily shown to be equivalent to KMM. The main research is devoted to LKID1 and LKID2. The former is simpler in the sense of having smaller number of rules and, after small change, satisfies cut elimination but fails to satisfy the subformula property. In LKID2 an additional analysis of different kinds of identities leads to proliferation of rules but yields the subformula property. This refined proof theoretic analysis leading to fully analytic calculus with constructive proof of cut elimination is the main contribution of the paper.

BOUNDED-ANALYTIC SEQUENT CALCULI AND EMBEDDINGS FOR HYPERSEQUENT LOGICS

AbstractA sequent calculus with the subformula property has long been recognised as a highly favourable starting point for the proof theoretic investigation of a logic. However, most logics of interest cannot be presented using a sequent calculus with the subformula property. In response, many formalisms more intricate than the sequent calculus have been formulated. In this work we identify an alternative: retain the sequent calculus but generalise the subformula property to permit specific axiom substitutions and their subformulas. Our investigation leads to a classification of generalised subformula properties and is applied to infinitely many substructural, intermediate, and modal logics (specifically: those with a cut-free hypersequent calculus). We also develop a complementary perspective on the generalised subformula properties in terms of logical embeddings. This yields new complexity upper bounds for contractive-mingle substructural logics and situates isolated results on the so-called simple substitution property within a general theory.

Normalisation and subformula property for a system of classical logic with Tarski\u2019s rule

This paper considers a formalisation of classical logic using general introduction rules and general elimination rules. It proposes a definition of ‘maximal formula’, ‘segment’ and ‘maximal segment’ suitable to the system, and gives reduction procedures for them. It is then shown that deductions in the system convert into normal form, i.e. deductions that contain neither maximal formulas nor maximal segments, and that deductions in normal form satisfy the subformula property. Tarski’s Rule is treated as a general introduction rule for implication. The general introduction rule for negation has a similar form. Maximal formulas with implication or negation as main operator require reduction procedures of a more intricate kind not present in normalisation for intuitionist logic.

Non-normal modal logics and conditional logics: Semantic analysis and proof theory

We introduce proper display calculi for basic monotonic modal logic, the conditional logic CK and a number of their axiomatic extensions. These calculi are sound, complete, conservative, and enjoy cut elimination and subformula property. Our proposal applies the multi-type methodology in the design of proper display calculi, starting from a semantic analysis which motivates syntactic translations from single-type non-normal modal logics to multi-type normal poly-modal logics.

Intuitionistic multi-agent subatomic natural deduction for belief and knowledge

Abstract This paper proposes natural deduction systems for the representation of inferences in which several agents participate in deriving conclusions about what they believe or know, where belief and knowledge are understood in an intuitionistic sense. Multi-agent derivations in these systems may involve relatively complex belief (resp. knowledge) constructions which may include forms of nested, reciprocal, shared, distributed or universal belief/knowledge as well as attitudes de dicto/re/se. The systems consist of two main components: multi-agent belief bases which assign to each agent a subatomic system that represents the agent’s beliefs concerning atomic sentences and a set of multi-agent labelled rules for logically compound formulae. Derivations in these systems normalize. Moreover, normal derivations possess the subexpression property (a refinement of the subformula property) which makes them fully analytic. Relying on the normalization result, a proof-theoretic approach to the semantics of the intensional operators for intuitionistic belief/knowledge is presented which explains their meaning entirely by appeal to the structure of derivations. Importantly, this proof-theoretic semantics is autarkic with respect to its foundations as the systems (unlike, e.g. external/labelled proof systems which internalize possible worlds truth conditions) are not defined on the basis of a possible worlds semantics. Detailed applications to a logical puzzle (McCarthy’s three wise men puzzle) and to a semantical difficulty (Geach’s problem of intentional identity), respectively, illustrate the systems. The paper also provides comparisons with other approaches to intuitionistic belief/knowledge and multi-agent natural deduction.

Proof Compression and NP Versus PSPACE II

We upgrade [3] to a complete proof of the conjecture NP = PSPACE that is known as one of the fundamental open problems in the mathematical theory of computational complexity; this proof is based on [2]. Since minimal propositional logic is known to be PSPACE complete, while PSPACE to include NP, it suffices to show that every valid purely implicational formula ρ has a proof whose weight (= total number of symbols) and time complexity of the provability involved are both polynomial in the weight of ρ. As is [3], we use proof theoretic approach. Recall that in [3] we considered any valid ρ in question that had (by the definition of validity) a “short” tree-like proof π in the Hudelmaier-style cutfree sequent calculus for minimal logic. The “shortness” means that the height of π and the total weight of different formulas occurring in it are both polynomial in the weight of ρ. However, the size (= total number of nodes), and hence also the weight, of π could be exponential in that of ρ. To overcome this trouble we embedded π into Prawitz’s proof system of natural deductions containing single formulas, instead of sequents. As in π, the height and the total weight of different formulas of the resulting tree-like natural deduction ∂1 were polynomial, although the size of ∂1 still could be exponential, in the weight of ρ. In our next, crucial move, ∂1 was deterministically compressed into a “small”, although multipremise, dag-like deduction ∂ whose horizontal levels contained only mutually different formulas, which made the whole weight polynomial in that of ρ. However, ∂ required a more complicated verification of the underlying provability of ρ. In this paper we present a nondeterministic compression of ∂ into a desired standard dag-like deduction ∂0 that deterministically proves ρ in time and space polynomial in the weight of ρ.2 Together with [3] this completes the proof of NP = PSPACE.Natural deductions are essential for our proof. Tree-to-dag horizontal compression of π merging equal sequents, instead of formulas, is (possible but) not sufficient, since the total number of different sequents in π might be exponential in the weight of ρ – even assuming that all formulas occurring in sequents are subformulas of ρ. On the other hand, we need Hudelmaier’s cutfree sequent calculus in order to control both the height and total weight of different formulas of the initial tree-like proof π, since standard Prawitz’s normalization although providing natural deductions with the subformula property does not preserve polynomial heights. It is not clear yet if we can omit references to π even in the proof of the weaker result NP = coNP.