Displaying similar documents to “The Neg.-propositional Calculus”

Involutive Nonassociative Lambek Calculus: Sequent Systems and Complexity

Wojciech Buszkowski (2017)

Bulletin of the Section of Logic

Similarity:

In [5] we study Nonassociative Lambek Calculus (NL) augmented with De Morgan negation, satisfying the double negation and contraposition laws. This logic, introduced by de Grooté and Lamarche [10], is called Classical Non-Associative Lambek Calculus (CNL). Here we study a weaker logic InNL, i.e. NL with two involutive negations. We present a one-sided sequent system for InNL, admitting cut elimination. We also prove that InNL is PTIME.

An Alternative Natural Deduction for the Intuitionistic Propositional Logic

Mirjana Ilić (2016)

Bulletin of the Section of Logic

Similarity:

A natural deduction system NI, for the full propositional intuitionistic logic, is proposed. The operational rules of NI are obtained by the translation from Gentzen’s calculus LJ and the normalization is proved, via translations from sequent calculus derivations to natural deduction derivations and back.

The Method of Socratic Proofs Meets Correspondence Analysis

Dorota Leszczyńska-Jasion, Yaroslav Petrukhin, Vasilyi Shangin (2019)

Bulletin of the Section of Logic

Similarity:

The goal of this paper is to propose correspondence analysis as a technique for generating the so-called erotetic (i.e. pertaining to the logic of questions) calculi which constitute the method of Socratic proofs by Andrzej Wiśniewski. As we explain in the paper, in order to successfully design an erotetic calculus one needs invertible sequent-calculus-style rules. For this reason, the proposed correspondence analysis resulting in invertible rules can constitute a new foundation for...

A Modified Subformula Property for the Modal Logic S4.2

Mitio Takano (2019)

Bulletin of the Section of Logic

Similarity:

The modal logic S4.2 is S4 with the additional axiom ◊□A ⊃ □◊A. In this article, the sequent calculus GS4.2 for this logic is presented, and by imposing an appropriate restriction on the application of the cut-rule, it is shown that, every GS4.2-provable sequent S has a GS4.2-proof such that every formula occurring in it is either a subformula of some formula in S, or the formula □¬□B or ¬□B, where □B occurs in the scope of some occurrence of □ in some formula of S. These are just the...