Focusing is a proof-theoretic device to structure proof search in the sequent calculus: it provides a normal form to cut-free proofs in which the application of invertible and non-invertible inference rules is structured in two separate and disjoint phases. It is commonly believed that every “reasonable” sequent calculus has a natural focused version. Although stemming from proof-search considerations, focusing has not been thoroughly investigated in actual theorem proving, in par- ticular w.r.t. termination, if not for the folk observations that only neg- ative formulas need to be duplicated (or contracted if seen from the top down) in the focusing phase. We present a contraction-free (and hence terminating) focused proof system for multi-succedent propositional intu- itionistic logic, which refines the G4ip calculus of Vorob’ev, Hudelmeier and Dyckhoff. We prove the completeness of the approach semantically and argue that this offers a viable alternative to other more syntactical means.
Avellone, A., Fiorentini, C., Momigliano, A. (2013). Focusing on Contraction. In Proceedings of the 28th Italian Conference on Computational Logic. Catania, Italy, September 25-27, 2013 (pp.65-81).
Focusing on Contraction
AVELLONE, ALESSANDRO;
2013
Abstract
Focusing is a proof-theoretic device to structure proof search in the sequent calculus: it provides a normal form to cut-free proofs in which the application of invertible and non-invertible inference rules is structured in two separate and disjoint phases. It is commonly believed that every “reasonable” sequent calculus has a natural focused version. Although stemming from proof-search considerations, focusing has not been thoroughly investigated in actual theorem proving, in par- ticular w.r.t. termination, if not for the folk observations that only neg- ative formulas need to be duplicated (or contracted if seen from the top down) in the focusing phase. We present a contraction-free (and hence terminating) focused proof system for multi-succedent propositional intu- itionistic logic, which refines the G4ip calculus of Vorob’ev, Hudelmeier and Dyckhoff. We prove the completeness of the approach semantically and argue that this offers a viable alternative to other more syntactical means.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
paper-l05.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
552 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
552 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.