Canonical proof nets for classical logic

Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 164 (6):702-732 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Proof nets provide abstract counterparts to sequent proofs modulo rule permutations; the idea being that if two proofs have the same underlying proof-net, they are in essence the same proof. Providing a convincing proof-net counterpart to proofs in the classical sequent calculus is thus an important step in understanding classical sequent calculus proofs. By convincing, we mean that there should be a canonical function from sequent proofs to proof nets, it should be possible to check the correctness of a net in polynomial time, every correct net should be obtainable from a sequent calculus proof, and there should be a cut-elimination procedure which preserves correctness.Previous attempts to give proof-net-like objects for propositional classical logic have failed at least one of the above conditions. In Richard McKinley [22], the author presented a calculus of proof nets satisfying and ; the paper defined a sequent calculus corresponding to expansion nets but gave no explicit demonstration of . That sequent calculus, called LK⁎LK⁎ in this paper, is a novel one-sided sequent calculus with both additively and multiplicatively formulated disjunction rules. In this paper [22]), we give a full proof of for expansion nets with respect to LK⁎LK⁎, and in addition give a cut-elimination procedure internal to expansion nets – this makes expansion nets the first notion of proof-net for classical logic satisfying all four criteria.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,619

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Focusing Gentzen’s LK Proof System.Chuck Liang & Dale Miller - 2024 - In Thomas Piecha & Kai F. Wehmeier (eds.), Peter Schroeder-Heister on Proof-Theoretic Semantics. Springer. pp. 275-313.
Proofs with monotone cuts.Emil Jeřábek - 2012 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 58 (3):177-187.
LEt ® , LR °[^( ~ )], LK and cutfree proofs.Katalin Bimbó - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (5):557-570.
2-Sequent calculus: a proof theory of modalities.Andrea Masini - 1992 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 58 (3):229-246.
A proof-search procedure for intuitionistic propositional logic.R. Alonderis - 2013 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 52 (7-8):759-778.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
86 (#240,815)

6 months
6 (#820,551)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

The structure of multiplicatives.Vincent Danos & Laurent Regnier - 1989 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 28 (3):181-203.
A compact representation of proofs.Dale A. Miller - 1987 - Studia Logica 46 (4):347 - 370.
Locality for Classical Logic.Kai Brünnler - 2006 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 47 (4):557-580.

Add more references