MultiLanguage systems (ML systems) are formal systems allowing the use of multiple distinct logical languages. In this paper we introduce a class of ML systems which use a hierarchy of first order languages, each language containing names for the language below, and propose them as an alternative to modal logics. The motivations of our proposal are technical, epistemological and implementational. From a technical point of view, we prove, among other things, that the set of theorems of the most common modal logics can be embedded (under the obvious bijective mapping between a modal and a first order language) into that of the corresponding ML systems. Moreover, we show that ML systems have properties not holding for modal logics and argue that these properties are justified by our intuitions. This claim is motivated by the study of how ML systems can be used in the representation of beliefs (more generally, propositional attitudes) and provability, two areas where modal logics have been extensively used. Finally, from an implementation point of view, we argue that ML systems resemble closely the current practice in the computer representation of propositional attitudes and metatheoretic theorem proving.

Abstract not found

Proof planning is a paradigm for the automation of proof that focuses on encoding intelligence to guide the proof process. The idea is to capture common patterns of reasoning which can be used to derive abstract descriptions of proofs known as proof plans. These can then be executed to provide fully formal proofs. This thesis concerns the development and analysis of a novel approach to proof planning that focuses on an explicit representation of choices during search. We embody our approach as a proof planner for the generic proof assistant Isabelle and use the Isar language, which is human-readable and machine-checkable, to represent proof plans. Within this framework we develop an inductive theorem prover as a case study of our approach to proof planning. Our prover uses the difference reduction heuristic known as rippling to automate the step cases of the inductive proofs. The development of a flexible approach to rippling that supports its various modifications and extensions is the second major focus of this thesis. Here, our inductive theorem prover provides a context in which to evaluate rippling experimentally. This work results in an efficient and powerful inductive theorem prover for Isabelle as well as proposals for further improving the efficiency of rippling. We also draw observations in order

We propose multi-context systems (MC systems) as a formal framework for the specification of complex reasoning. MC systems provide the ability to structure the specification of "global" reasoning in terms of "local" reasoning sub-patterns. Each sub-pattern is modeled as a deduction in a context, formally defined as an axiomatic formal system. The global reasoning pattern is modeled as a concatenation of contextual deductions via bridge rules, i.e. inference rules that infer a fact in one context from facts asserted in other contexts. Besides the formal framework, in this paper we propose a three layer architecture designed to specify and automatize complex reasoning. At the first level we have object-level contexts (called s-contexts) for domain specifications. Problem solving principles and, more in general, meta-level knowledge about the application domain is specified in a distinct context, called Problem Solving Context (PSC). On top of s-contexts and PSC, we have a further context, called MT , where it is possible to specify strategies to control multi-context reasoning spanning through s-contexts and PSC. We show how GETFOL can be used as a computer tool for the implementation of MC systems and for the automatization of multi-context deductions.

this article I will be looking at the leading question from the point of view of the logician, and for a substantial part of that, from the perspective of one supremely important logician: Kurt Godel. From the time of his stunning incompleteness results in 1931 to the end of his life, Godel called for the pursuit of new axioms to settle undecided arithmetical problems. And from 1947 on, with the publication of his unusual article, "What is Cantor's continuum problem?" [11], he called in addition for the pursuit of new axioms to settle Cantor's famous conjecture about the cardinal number of the continuum. In both cases, he pointed primarily to schemes of higher infinity in set theory as the direction in which to seek these new principles. Logicians have learned a great deal in recent years that is relevant to Godel's program, but there is considerable disagreement about what conclusions to draw from their results. I'm far from unbiased in this respect, and you'll see how I come out on these matters by the end of this essay, but I will try to give you a fair presentation of other positions along the way so you can decide for yourself which you favor.

The first part of the paper introduces the varieties of modern constructive mathematics, concentrating on Bishop's constructive mathematics (BISH). It gives a sketch of both Myhill's axiomatic system for BISH and a constructive axiomatic development of the real line R. The second part of the paper focusses on the relation between constructive mathematics and programming, with emphasis on Martin-Lof's theory of types as a formal system for BISH. 1 What is Constructive Mathematics? The story of modern constructive mathematics begins with the publication, in 1907, of L.E.J. Brouwer's doctoral dissertation Over de Grondslagen der Wiskunde [18], in which he gave the first exposition of his philosophy of intuitionism (a general philosophy, not merely one for mathematics). According to Brouwer, mathematics is a creation of the human mind, and precedes logic: the logic we use in mathematics grows from mathematical practice, and is not some a priori given before mathematical activity c...

this paper. Once we agree to accept and use it we enter a new world and discover many facts for which there does not exist a classical counterpart. The principle entails for instance that the union of the two closed sets [0, 1] and [1, 2] is not a countable intersection of open subsets of R. One may also infer that there are unions of three closed sets di#erent from every union of two closed sets. These observations are the tip of an iceberg. The intuitionistic Borel Hierarchy shows o# an exquisite fine structure

form of Godel's first theorem: Let P be a set of Godel numbers of all the provable sentences. If the set # is expressible in correct, then there is a true sentence of not provable in L.

Digital evidence is playing an increasingly important role in prosecuting crimes. The reasons are manifold: financially lucrative targets are now connected online, systems are so complex that vulnerabilities abound and strong digital identities are being adopted, making audit trails more useful. If the discoveries of forensic analysts are to hold up to scrutiny in court, they must meet the standard for scientific evidence. Software systems are currently developed without consideration of this fact. This paper argues for the development of a formal framework for constructing “digital artifacts ” that can serve as proxies for physical evidence; a system so imbued would facilitate sound digital forensic inference. A case study involving a filesystem augmentation that provides transparent support for forensic inference is described.

1 Descriptive use of logic and Intended models 1 1.1 Standard models of arithmetic.......................... 1 1.2 Axiomatics and Formal theories......................... 3 1.3 Hintikka and the two uses of logic in mathematics.............. 5