Results 1  10
of
15
Normal Multimodal Logics With Interaction Axioms: A Tableau Calculus and Some (Un)Decidability Results
, 2000
"... In this paper we present a prefixed analytic tableau calculus for a wide class of normal multimodal logics; the calculus can deal in a uniform way with any logic in this class. To achieve this goal, we use a prefixed tableau calculus a la Fitting, where we explicitly represent accessibility relation ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we present a prefixed analytic tableau calculus for a wide class of normal multimodal logics; the calculus can deal in a uniform way with any logic in this class. To achieve this goal, we use a prefixed tableau calculus a la Fitting, where we explicitly represent accessibility relations between worlds by means of a graph and we use the characterizing axioms as rewriting rules. Such rules create new paths among worlds in the countermodel construction. The prefixed tableau method is, then, used to prove (un)decidability results about certain classes of multimodal logics.
Bringing them all Together
, 2001
"... this paper, Jerry Seligman takes us on an interesting journey. The satisfaction denition of most modal operators is specied in terms of rstorder conditions. Hence we can always obtain a complete calculus for the basic logic characterizing any collection of such operators by appealing to a calculus ..."
Abstract

Cited by 17 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
this paper, Jerry Seligman takes us on an interesting journey. The satisfaction denition of most modal operators is specied in terms of rstorder conditions. Hence we can always obtain a complete calculus for the basic logic characterizing any collection of such operators by appealing to a calculus which is complete for the full rstorder language. Seligman shows here that by making use of the expressiveness provided by the hybrid apparatus, we can, step by step, transform a rstorder sequent calculus into an internalized sequent calculus specically tailored for a particular hybrid fragment
Sequent Calculi for Nominal Tense Logics: A Step Towards Mechanization?
, 1999
"... . We define sequentstyle calculi for nominal tense logics characterized by classes of modal frames that are firstorder definable by certain \Pi 0 1 formulae and \Pi 0 2 formulae. The calculi are based on d'Agostino and Mondadori's calculus KE and therefore they admit a restrict ..."
Abstract

Cited by 16 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. We define sequentstyle calculi for nominal tense logics characterized by classes of modal frames that are firstorder definable by certain \Pi 0 1 formulae and \Pi 0 2 formulae. The calculi are based on d'Agostino and Mondadori's calculus KE and therefore they admit a restricted cutrule that is not eliminable. A nice computational property of the restriction is, for instance, that at any stage of the proof, only a finite number of potential cutformulae needs to be taken under consideration. Although restrictions on the proof search (preserving completeness) are given in the paper and most of them are theoretically appealing, the use of those calculi for mechanization is however doubtful. Indeed, we present sequent calculi for fragments of classical logic that are syntactic variants of the sequent calculi for the nominal tense logics. 1 Introduction Background. The nominal tense logics are extensions of Prior tense logics (see e.g. [Pri57, RU71]) by adding nomina...
Extended CurryHoward Correspondence for a Basic Constructive Modal Logic
 In Proceedings of Methods for Modalities
, 2001
"... this paper. This calculus satises cutelimination, as for instance shown (in a more complicated form) in [Wij90]. This calculus is dierent from what is usually taken as the basic constructive system K, as we do not assume the distribution of possibility (3) over disjunctions neither in its binary f ..."
Abstract

Cited by 10 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper. This calculus satises cutelimination, as for instance shown (in a more complicated form) in [Wij90]. This calculus is dierent from what is usually taken as the basic constructive system K, as we do not assume the distribution of possibility (3) over disjunctions neither in its binary form 3(A _ B) ! (3A _ 3B) nor in its nullary form 3? ! ? The sequent calculus above corresponds to an axiomatic formulation given by axioms for intuitionistic logic, plus axioms: 2(A ! B) ! (2A ! 2B) 2(A ! B) ! (3A ! 3B) 2A3B ! 3(A B) together with rules for Modus Ponens and Necessitation: ` A ! B ` A ` B MP ` A ` 2A Nec Wijesekera proved a Craig interpolation theorem, one of the usual consequences of syntactic cutelimination and produced Kripke, algebraic and topological semantics for a calculus very similar to the one above. The only dierence is that he does assume 3? ! ?. From our \wish list" for logical systems only a natural deduction formulation and a categorical semantics are missing. These we proceed to discuss
Automated Natural Deduction for Propositional Lineartime Temporal Logic ∗
"... We present a proof searching technique for the natural deduction calculus for the propositional lineartime temporal logic and prove its correctness. This opens the prospect to apply our technique as an automated reasoning tool in a number of emerging computer science applications and in a deliberat ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present a proof searching technique for the natural deduction calculus for the propositional lineartime temporal logic and prove its correctness. This opens the prospect to apply our technique as an automated reasoning tool in a number of emerging computer science applications and in a deliberative decision making framework across various AI applications. 1
Implementing Modal and Relevance Logics in a Logical Framework
, 1996
"... We present a framework for machine implementation of both partial and complete fragments of large families of nonclassical logics such as modal, relevance, and intuitionistic logics. We decompose a logic into two interacting parts, each a natural deduction system: a base logic of labelled formulae, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a framework for machine implementation of both partial and complete fragments of large families of nonclassical logics such as modal, relevance, and intuitionistic logics. We decompose a logic into two interacting parts, each a natural deduction system: a base logic of labelled formulae, and a theory of labels characterizing the properties of the Kripke models. Our approach is modular and supports uniform proofs of correctness and proof normalization. We have implemented our work in the Isabelle Logical Framework.
Proof Theory of a MultiLane Spatial Logic⋆
"... ATRs (AVACS Technical Reports) are freely downloadable from www.avacs.org Copyright c © Mai 2014 by the author(s) ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
ATRs (AVACS Technical Reports) are freely downloadable from www.avacs.org Copyright c © Mai 2014 by the author(s)
Does the deduction theorem fail for modal logic?
, 2010
"... Various sources in the literature claim that the deduction theorem does not hold for normal modal or epistemic logic, whereas others present versions of the deduction theorem for several normal modal systems. It is shown here that the apparent problem arises from an objectionable notion of derivabil ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Various sources in the literature claim that the deduction theorem does not hold for normal modal or epistemic logic, whereas others present versions of the deduction theorem for several normal modal systems. It is shown here that the apparent problem arises from an objectionable notion of derivability from assumptions in an axiomatic system. When a traditional Hilberttype system of axiomatic logic is generalized into a system for derivations from assumptions, the necessitation rule has to be modified in a way that restricts its use to cases in which the premiss does not depend on assumptions. This restriction is entirely analogous to the restriction of the rule of universal generalization of firstorder logic. A necessitation rule with this restriction permits a proof of the deduction theorem in its usual formulation. Other suggestions presented in the literature to deal with the problem are reviewed, and the present solution is argued to be preferable to the other alternatives. A contractionand cutfree sequent calculus equivalent to the Hilbert system for basic modal logic shows the standard failure argument untenable by proving the underivability of 2A from A. 1.
TruthValues as Labels: A General Recipe for Labelled Deduction
"... We introduce a general recipe for presenting nonclassical logics in a modular and uniform way as labelled natural deduction systems. Our recipe is based on a labelling mechanism where labels are general entities that are present, in one way or another, in all logics, namely truthvalues. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We introduce a general recipe for presenting nonclassical logics in a modular and uniform way as labelled natural deduction systems. Our recipe is based on a labelling mechanism where labels are general entities that are present, in one way or another, in all logics, namely truthvalues.