Abstract
In this paper I give conditions under which a matrix characterisation of validity is correct for first order logics where quantifications are restricted by statements from a theory. Unfortunately the usual definition of path closure in a matrix is unsuitable and a less pleasant definition must be used. I derive the matrix theorem from syntactic analysis of a suitable tableau system, but by choosing a tableau system for restricted quantification I generalise Wallen's earlier work on modal logics. The tableau system is only correct if a new condition I call “alphabetical monotonicity” holds. I sketch how the result can be applied to a wide range of logics such as first order variants of many standard modal logics, including non-serial modal logics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Peter B. Andrews,Theorem proving via general matings Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 28 (1981), pp. 193–214.
Yves Auffray andPatrice Enjalbert,Modal theorem proving, an equationa viewpoint Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA 1989, pp. 441–445.
Wolfgang Bibel,Automated Theorem Proving, Vieweg, second edition, 1987.
R. S. Boyer andJ. S. Moore,The sharing of structure in theorem-proving programs, inMachine Intelligence 7, B. Meltzer and D. Michie (eds), Edinburgh University Press, 1972, pp. 101 – 116.
Hans-Jurgen Burckert,A resolution principle for clauses with constraints in10th International Conference on Automated Deduction M. E. Stickel (ed.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1990, pp. 178–192.
Melvin Fitting,Tableau methods of proof for modal logics Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 13 (1972), pp. 237–247.
Melvin Fitting,Proof Methods for Modal and Intuitionistic Logics D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht 1983.
Alan M. Frisch,A general framework for sorted deduction: fundamental results on hybrid reasoning inProceedings of the First International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, R. J. Brachman, H. Levesque & R. Reiter (eds), Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA 1989. Revised version inArtificial Intelligence vol. 49 (1991), pp. 161 – 198.
Alan M. Frisch andRichard B. Scherl,A general framework for modal de duction inPrinciples of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Second International Conference, J. A. Allen, R. Fikes & E. Sandewall (eds), Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA 1991.
Ian P. Gent,Analytic Proof Systems for Classical and Modal Logics of Restricted Quantification PhD thesis, Warwick University, Coventry, England, in preparation, 1991.
J. W. Lloyd,Foundations of Logic Programming Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1984.
Charles G. Morgan,Methods for automated theorem proving in nonclassical logics IEEE Tansactions on Computers C-25 (1976), pp. 852–862.
Uwe Petermann,Towards a connection procedure with built in theories inLogics in AI, J. van Eijck (ed.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1990, pp. 444–453.
R. M. Smullyan,First Order Logic Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1968.
Mark E. Stickel,Automated deduction by theory resolution Journal of Automated Reasoning,1 (1985), pp. 333–355.
Lincoln A. Wallen,Generating connection calculi from tableau and sequent based proof systems inArtificial Intelligence and its Applications A. G. Cohn & J. R. Thomas (eds), John Wiley & Sons, Chichester 1986, pp. 35–50.
Lincoln A. Wallen,Automated Deduction in Nonclassical Logics MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1989.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gent, I.P. Theory matrices (for modal logics) using alphabetical monotonicity. Stud Logica 52, 233–257 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01058390
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01058390