The method of analytic tableaux is a direct descendant of Gentzen's cutfree sequent calculus and is regarded as a paradigm of the notion of analytic deduction in classical logic. However, cut-free systems are anomalous from the proof-theoretical, the semantical and the computational point of view. Firstly, they cannot represent the use of auxiliary lemmas in proofs. Secondly, they cannot express the bivalence of classical logic. Thirdly, they are extremely inefficient, as is emphasized by the "computational scandal" that such systems cannot polynomially simulate the truth-tables. None of these anomalies occurs if the cut rule is allowed. This raises the problem of formulating a proof system which incorporates a cut rule and yet can provide a suitable model of classical analytic deduction. For this purpose we present an alternative refutation system for classical logic, that we call KE. This system, though being "close" to Smullyan's tableau method, is not cut-free but includes a class...

page 14 Declaration - page 15 Notes of copyright and the ownership of intellectual property rights - page 15 The Author - page 16 Acknowledgements - page 16 1 - Introduction - page 17 1.1 - Background - page 17 1.2 - The Style of Approach - page 18 1.3 - Motivation - page 19 1.4 - Style of Presentation - page 20 1.5 - Outline of the Thesis - page 21 2 - Models and Modelling - page 23 2.1 - Some Types of Models - page 25 2.2 - Combinations of Models - page 28 2.3 - Parts of the Modelling Apparatus - page 33 2.4 - Models in Machine Learning - page 38 2.5 - The Philosophical Background to the Rest of this Thesis - page 41 Syntactic Measures of Complexity - page 3 - 3 - Problems and Properties - page 44 3.1 - Examples of Common Usage - page 44 3.1.1 - A case of nails - page 44 3.1.2 - Writing a thesis - page 44 3.1.3 - Mathematics - page 44 3.1.4 - A gas - page 44 3.1.5 - An ant hill - page 45 3.1.6 - A car engine - page 45 3.1.7 - A cell as part of an organism -...

We present well-ordering proofs for Martin-Lof's type theory with W-type and one universe. These proofs, together with an embedding of the type theory in a set theoretical system as carried out in [Set93] show that the proof theoretical strength of the type theory is precisely ## 1# I+# , which is slightly more than the strength of Feferman's theory T 0 , classical set theory KPI and the subsystem of analysis (# 1 2 -CA)+(BI). The strength of intensional and extensional version, of the version a la Tarski and a la Russell are shown to be the same. 0 Introduction 0.1 Proof theory and Type Theory Proof theory and type theory have been two answers of mathematical logic to the crisis of the foundations of mathematics at the beginning of the century. Proof theory was originally established by Hilbert in order to prove the consistency of theories by using finitary methods. When Godel showed that Hilbert's program cannot be carried out as originally intended, the focus of proof theory ch...

This paper compares two different styles of reasoning with inductively defined predicates, each style being encapsulated by a corresponding sequent calculus proof system. The first system supports traditional proof by induction, with induction rules formulated as sequent rules for introducing inductively defined predicates on the left of sequents. We show this system to be cut-free complete with respect to a natural class of Henkin models; the eliminability of cut follows as a corollary. The second system uses infinite (non-well-founded) proofs to represent arguments by infinite descent. In this system, the left rules for inductively defined predicates are simple case-split rules, and an infinitary, global condition on proof trees is required to ensure soundness. We show this system to be cut-free complete with respect to standard models, and again infer the eliminability of cut. The second infinitary system is unsuitable for formal reasoning. However, it has a natural restriction to proofs given by regular trees, i.e. to those proofs representable by finite graphs. This restricted “cyclic ” system subsumes the first system for proof by induction. We conjecture that the two systems are in fact equivalent, i.e., that proof by induction is equivalent to regular proof by infinite descent.

Abstract We introduce a sequent calculus B for a new logic, named basic logic. The aim of basic logic is to find a structure in the space of logics. Classical, intuitionistic, quantum and non-modal linear logics, are all obtained as extensions in a uniform way and in a single framework. We isolate three properties, which characterize B positively: reflection, symmetry and visibility. A logical constant obeys to the principle of reflection if it is characterized semantically by an equation binding it with a metalinguistic link between assertions, and if its syntactic inference rules are obtained by solving that equation. All connectives of basic logic satisfy reflection. To the control of weakening and contraction of linear logic, basic logic adds a strict control of contexts, by requiring that all active formulae in all rules are isolated, that is visible. From visibility, cut-elimination follows. The full, geometric symmetry of basic logic induces known symmetries of its extensions, and adds a symmetry among them, producing the structure of a cube.

Abstract not found

We prove the completeness of extended SLDNF-resolution for the new class of #-programs with respect to the three-valued completion of a logic program. Not only the class of allowed programs but also the class of definite programs are contained in the class of #-programs. To understand better the three-valued completion of a logic program we introduce a formal system for three-valued logic in which one can derive exactly the three-valued consequences of the completion of a logic program. The system is proof theoretically interesting, since it is a fragment of Gentzen's sequent calculus LK. Keywords: Logic programming; three-valued logic; negation as failure; SLDNFresolution; sequent calculus. 1

This is a survey of some of the principal developments in proof theory from its inception in the 1920s, at the hands of David Hilbert, up to the 1960s. Hilbert's aim was to use this as a tool in his nitary consistency program to eliminate the \actual in nite " in mathematics from proofs of purely nitary statements. One of the main approaches that turned out to be the most useful in pursuit of this program was that due to Gerhard Gentzen, in the 1930s, via his calculi of \sequents" and his Cut-Elimination Theorem for them. Following that we trace how and why prima facie in nitary concepts, such as ordinals, and in nitary methods, such as the use of in nitely long proofs, gradually came to dominate proof-theoretical developments. In this rst lecture I will give anoverview of the developments in proof theory since Hilbert's initiative in establishing the subject in the 1920s. For this purpose I am following the rst part of a series of expository lectures that I gave for the Logic Colloquium `94 held in Clermont-Ferrand 21-23 July 1994, but haven't published. The theme of my lectures there was that although Hilbert established his theory of proofs as a part of his foundational program and, for philosophical reasons whichwe shall get into, aimed to have it developed in a completely nitistic way, the actual work in proof theory This is the rst of three lectures that I delivered at the conference, Proof Theory: History

Abstract not found

We show that Smullyan's analytic tableaux cannot p-simulate the truth-tables. We identify the cause of this computational breakdown and relate it to an underlying semantic difficulty which is common to the whole tradition originating in Gentzen's sequent calculus, namely the dissonance between cut-free proofs and the Principle of Bivalence. Finally we discuss some ways in which this principle can be built into a tableau-like method without affecting its "analytic" nature. 1 Introduction The truth-table method, introduced by Wittgenstein in his Tractatus LogicoPhilosophicus, provides a decision procedure for propositional logic which is immediately implementable on a machine. However this time-honoured method is usually mentioned only to be immediately dismissed because of its incurable inefficiency. The well-known tableau method (which is closely related to Gentzen's cut-free sequent calculus) is commonly regarded as a "shortcut" in testing the logical validity of complex propositions...