Abstract
As modern Automated Deduction systems rely heavily on the use of a machine-oriented representation of a given problem, together with sophisticated redundancy-avoiding techniques, a major task in convincing human users of the correctness of automatically generated proofs is the intelligible representation of these proofs. In this paper, we propose the use of the cut-rule in the human-oriented presentation of computer-generated proofs. The intelligent application of cuts enables the integration of essential lemmata and therefore shortens and structures proof presentation. We show that many translation techniques in Automated Deduction, such as antiprenexing and some forms of normal form translations, can be described as cuts and are indeed part of the deductive solution of a problem. Furthermore, we demonstrate the connection between symmetric simplification, quantorial extension principles and the application of the cut-rule.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
P. B. Andrews. Resolution in Type Theory. J. Symbolic Logic, 36:414–432, 1971.
P. B. Andrews. Transforming Matings into Natural Deduction Proofs. In W.Bibel and R. Kowalski, editors, Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 87 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 281–292. Springer Verlag, 1980.
P. B. Andrews. Theorem Proving via General Matings. Journal of the ACM, 28(2):193–214, 1981.
M. Baaz, C. Fermüller, and A. Leitsch. A Non-Elementary Speed Up in Proof Length by Structural Clause Form Transformation. In Proceedings of the Logic in ] Computer Science Conference, pages 213–219, 1994.
M. Baaz and A. Leitsch. Complexity of Resolution Proofs and Function Introduction. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 57:181–215, 1992.
M. Baaz and A. Leitsch. On Skolemization and Proof Complexity. Fundamenta Informaticae, 20:353–379, 1994.
W. Bibel. Automated Theorem Proving. Vieweg, Braunschweig, second edition, 1987.
W. Bibel. Deduction: Automated Logic. Academic Press, London, 1993.
S. R. Buss. The Undecidability of k-Provability. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 53:75–102, 1991.
C. L. Chang and R. C. Lee. Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, New York, 1973.
E. Eder. Relative Complexities of First Order Calculi. Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1992.
U. Egly. Shortening Proofs by Quantifier Introduction. In A. Voronkov, editor, Proceedings of the International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, pages 148–159. Springer Verlag, 1992.
U. Egly.On Different Concepts of Function Introduction. In G. Gottlob, A. Leitsch, and D. Mundici, editors, Proceedings of the Kurt Gödel Colloquium, pages 172–183. Springer Verlag, 1993.
U. Egly. On Methods of Function Introduction and Related Concepts. PhD thesis, TH Darmstadt, Alexanderstr. 10, D-64283 Darmstadt, 1994.
U. Egly. On the Value of Antiprenexing. In F. Pfenning, editor, Proceedings of the International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, pages 69–83. Springer Verlag, 1994.
U. Egly. On Different Structure-preserving Translations to Normal Form. J. Symbolic Computation, 22:121–142, 1996.
A. P. Felty. Using Extended Tactics to do Proof Transformations. Technical Report MS-CIS-86-89 ZINC LAB 48, Department of Computer and Information Science, Moore School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, 1986.
K. Genther. Repräsentation von Konnektionsbeweisen in Gentzen-Kalkülen durch Transformation und Strukturierung. Master's thesis, TH Darmstadt, 1995.
G. Gentzen. Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39:176–210, 405–431, 1935. English translation: “Investigations into Logical Deduction” in [27], pp. 68–131.
J. Goubault. A BDD-Based Simplification and Skolemization Procedure. J. of the IGPL, 3(6):827–855, 1995.
C. Lingenfelder. Transformation and Structuring of Computer Generated Proofs. Technical Report SR-90-26, Universität Kaiserslautern, 1990.
D. Miller and A. Felty. An Integration of Resolution and Natural Deduction Theorem Proving. In T. Kehler, S. Rosenschein, R. Folman, and P. F. Patel-Schneider, editors, Proceedings of the 5th AAAI National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 198–202. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1986.
D. A. Miller. Proofs in Higher-Order Logic. Technical Report MS-CIS-83-37, Department of Computer and Information Science, Moore School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, 1983.
D. A. Miller. Expansion Tree Proofs and their Conversion to Natural Deduction Proofs. In R. E. Shostak, editor, Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 170 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 375–393. Springer Verlag, 1984.
F. Pfenning and D. Nesmith. Presenting Intuitive Deductions via Symmetric Simplification. In M. E. Stickel, editor, Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Automated Deduction, volume 449 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 226–350. Springer Verlag, 1990.
R. Statman. Lower Bounds on Herbrand's Theorem. In Proc. AMS 75, pages 104–107, 1979.
M. E. Szabo, editor. The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1969.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Egly, U., Genther, K. (1997). Structuring of computer-generated proofs by cut introduction. In: Gottlob, G., Leitsch, A., Mundici, D. (eds) Computational Logic and Proof Theory. KGC 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1289. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63385-5_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63385-5_39
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63385-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69806-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive