It is well-known that weakening and contraction cause naïve categorical models of the classical sequent calculus to collapse to Boolean lattices. Starting from a convenient formulation of the well-known categorical semantics of linear classical sequent proofs, we give models of weakening and contraction that do not collapse. Cut-reduction is interpreted by a partial order between morphisms. Our models make no commitment to any translation of classical logic into intuitionistic logic and distinguish non-deterministic choices of cut-elimination. We show soundness and completeness via initial models built from proof nets, and describe models built from sets and relations.

Vol. 2 (4:3) 2006, pp. 1–44 www.lmcs-online.org

In its most general meaning, a Boolean category is to categories what a Boolean algebra is to posets. In a more specific meaning a Boolean category should provide the abstract algebraic structure underlying the proofs in Boolean Logic, in the same sense as a Cartesian closed category captures the proofs in intuitionistic logic and a *-autonomous category captures the proofs in linear logic. However, recent work has shown that there is no canonical axiomatisation of a Boolean category. In this work, we will see a series (with increasing strength) of possible such axiomatisations, all based on the notion of *-autonomous category. We will particularly focus on the medial map, which has its origin in an inference rule in KS, a cut-free deductive system for Boolean logic in the calculus of structures. Finally, we will present a category proof nets as a particularly well-behaved example of a Boolean category.

Deep inference is a proof-theoretic notion in which proof rules apply arbitrarily deeply inside a formula. We show that the essence of deep inference is the bifunctoriality of the connectives. We demonstrate that, when given an inequational theory that models cut-reduction, a deep inference calculus for classical logic (SKSg) is a categorical model of the classical sequent calculus LK in the sense of F uhrmann and Pym. We observe that this gives a notion of cut-reduction for derivations in SKSg, for which the usual notion of cut in SKSg is a special case. Viewing SKSg as a model of the sequent calculus uncovers new insights into the Craig interpolation lemma and intuitionistic provability.

Abstract. Theorem proving, or algorithmic proof-search, is an essential enabling technology throughout the computational sciences. We explain the mathematical basis of proof-search as the combination of reductive logic together with a control régime. Then we present a games semantics for reductive logic and show how it may be used to model two important examples of control, namely backtracking and uniform proof. 1 Introduction to reductive logic and proof-search Theorem proving, or algorithmic proof-search, is an essential enabling technology throughout the computational sciences. We explain the mathematical basis of proof-search as the combination of reductive logic together with a control régime. Then we present a games semantics for reductive logic and show how it may be used to model two important

It is well-known that weakening and contraction cause naïve categorical models of the classical sequent calculus to collapse to Boolean lattices. In previous work, summarized briefly herein, we have provided a class of models called classical categories which is sound and complete and avoids this collapse by interpreting cut-reduction by a poset-enrichment. Examples of classical categories include boolean lattices and the category of sets and relations, where both conjunction and disjunction are modelled by the set-theoretic product. In this article, which is self-contained, we present an improved axiomatization of classical categories, together with a deep exploration of their structural theory. Observing that the collapse already happens in the absence of negation, we start with negation-free models called Dummett categories. Examples include, besides the classical categories above, the category of sets and relations, where both conjunction and disjunction are modelled by the disjoint union. We prove that Dummett categories are MIX, and that the partial order can be derived from hom-semilattices which have a straightforward proof-theoretic definition. Moreover, we show that the Geometry-of-Interaction construction can be extended from multiplicative linear logic to classical logic, by applying it to obtain a classical

Proofs Without Syntax [37] introduced polynomial-time checkable combinatorial proofs for classical propositional logic. This sequel approaches Hilbert’s 24 th Problem with combinatorial proofs as abstract invariants for sequent calculus proofs, analogous to homotopy groups as abstract invariants for topological spaces. The paper lifts a simple, strongly normalising cut elimination from combinatorial proofs to sequent calculus, factorising away the mechanical commutations of structural rules which litter traditional syntactic cut elimination. Sequent calculus fails to be surjective onto combinatorial proofs: the paper extracts a semantically motivated closure of sequent calculus from which there is a surjection, pointing towards an abstract combinatorial refinement of Herbrand’s theorem.

should be used for describing an object that

Deep inference is a proof-theoretic notion in which proof rules apply arbitrarily deeply inside a formula. We show that the essense of deep inference is the bifunctorality of the connectives. We demonstrate that, when given an inequational theory that models cut-reduction, a deep inference calculus for classical logic (SKSg) is a categorical model of the classical sequent calculus LK in the sense of Führmann and Pym. We uncover a mismatch between this notion of cut-reduction and the usual notion of cut in SKSg. Viewing SKSg as a model of the sequent calculus uncovers new insights into the Craig interpolation lemma and intuitionistic provablility. 1.

This paper presents an abstract, mathematical formulation of classical propositional logic. It proceeds layer by layer: (1) abstract, syntax-free propositions; (2) abstract, syntax-free contraction-weakening proofs; (3) distribution; (4) axioms p ∨ p. Abstract propositions correspond to objects of the category G(Rel L) where G is the Hyland-Tan double glueing