Abstract
General and effective methods are required for providing good automation strategies to prove properties of sequent systems. Structural properties such as admissibility, invertibility, and permutability of rules are crucial in proof theory, and they can be used for proving other key properties such as cut-elimination. However, finding proofs for these properties requires inductive reasoning over the provability relation, which is often quite elaborated, exponentially exhaustive, and error prone. This paper aims at developing automatic techniques for proving structural properties of sequent systems. The proposed techniques are presented in the rewriting logic metalogical framework, and use rewrite- and narrowing-based reasoning. They have been fully mechanized in Maude and achieve a great degree of automation when used on several sequent systems, including intuitionistic and classical logics, linear logic, and normal modal logics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Andreoli, J.-M.: Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic. J. Logic Comput. 2(3), 297–347 (1992)
Bruni, R., Meseguer, J.: Semantic foundations for generalized rewrite theories. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 360(1–3), 386–414 (2006)
Brünnler, K.: Deep sequent systems for modal logic. Arch. Math. Logic 48, 551–577 (2009)
Cervesato, I., Pfenning, F.: A linear logical framework. Inf. Comput. 179(1), 19–75 (2002)
Ciabattoni, A., Galatos, N., Terui, K.: From axioms to analytic rules in nonclassical logics. In: LICS, pp. 229–240. IEEE Computer Society Press (2008)
Clavel, M., et al.: All About Maude - A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS, vol. 4350. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71999-1
Gentzen, G.: Investigations into logical deduction. In: Szabo, M.E. (ed.) The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen, North-Holland, pp. 68–131 (1969)
Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 50, 1–102 (1987)
Lahav, O., Marcos, J., Zohar, Y.: Sequent systems for negative modalities. Logica Universalis 11(3), 345–382 (2017)
Lellmann, B.: Linear nested sequents, 2-sequents and hypersequents. In: De Nivelle, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9323, pp. 135–150. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24312-2_10
Lellmann, B., Pimentel, E.: Proof search in nested sequent calculi. In: Davis, M., Fehnker, A., McIver, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2015. LNCS, vol. 9450, pp. 558–574. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48899-7_39
Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J., Scedrov, A., Shankar, N.: Decision problems for propositional linear logic. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 56, 239–311 (1992)
Maehara, S.: Eine darstellung der intuitionistischen logik in der klassischen. Nagoya Math. J. 7, 45–64 (1954)
Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J.: Rewriting logic as a logical and semantic framework. In: Gabbay, D.M., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pp. 1–87. Springer, Dordrecht (2002)
Meseguer, J.: Conditional rewriting logic as a unified model of concurrency. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)
Miller, D., Pimentel, E.: A formal framework for specifying sequent calculus proof systems. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 474, 98–116 (2013)
Miller, D., Saurin, A.: From proofs to focused proofs: a modular proof of focalization in linear logic. In: Duparc, J., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CSL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4646, pp. 405–419. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74915-8_31
Nigam, V., Pimentel, E., Reis, G.: An extended framework for specifying and reasoning about proof systems. J. Logic Comput. 26(2), 539–576 (2016)
Nigam, V., Reis, G., Lima, L.: Quati: an automated tool for proving permutation lemmas. In: Demri, S., Kapur, D., Weidenbach, C. (eds.) IJCAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8562, pp. 255–261. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08587-6_18
Pfenning, F.: Structural cut elimination I. Intuitionistic and classical logic. Inf. Comput. 157(1/2), 84–141 (2000)
Troelstra, A.S., Schwichtenberg, H.: Basic Proof Theory. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)
Viry, P.: Equational rules for rewriting logic. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 285(2), 487–517 (2002)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The work of the three authors was supported by CAPES, Colciencias, and INRIA via the STIC AmSud project “EPIC: EPistemic Interactive Concurrency” (Proc. No 88881.117603/2016-01). The work of Pimentel and Olarte was also supported by CNPq and the project FWF START Y544-N23.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Olarte, C., Pimentel, E., Rocha, C. (2018). Proving Structural Properties of Sequent Systems in Rewriting Logic. In: Rusu, V. (eds) Rewriting Logic and Its Applications. WRLA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11152. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99840-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99840-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99839-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99840-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)