Abstract
In this paper two different natural deduction systems forhybrid logic are compared and contrasted.One of the systems was originally given by the author of the presentpaper whereasthe other system under consideration is a modifiedversion of a natural deductionsystem given by Jerry Seligman.We give translations in both directions between the systems,and moreover, we devise a set of reduction rules forthe latter system bytranslation of already known reduction rules for the former system.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Areces, C., Blackburn, P., and Marx, M., 2001, “Hybrid logics: Characterization, interpolation and complexity, ” Journal of Symbolic Logic 66, 977-1010.
Benton, N., Bierman, G.M., de Paiva, V.C.V., and Hyland, M., 1992, “Term assignment for intuitionistic linear logic, ” Technical Report 262, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge.
Benton, N., Bierman, G.M., de Paiva, V.C.V., and Hyland, M., 1993, “A term calculus for intuitionistic linear logic, ” pp. 75-90 in Proceedings of First International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, M. Bezem and J.F. Groote, eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 664, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Bierman, G.M. and de Paiva, V.C.V., 2000, “On an intuitionistic modal logic, ” Studia Logica 65, 383-416.
Blackburn, P., 2000, “Internalizing labelled deduction, ” Journal of Logic and Computation 10, 137-168.
Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., and Venema, Y., 2001, Modal Logic, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 53, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Braüner, T., 1996, “An axiomatic approach to adequacy, ” Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Aarhus, 168 pages. Published as Technical Report BRICS-DS-96-4.
Braüner, T., 2003, “Natural deduction for hybrid logic, ” Journal of Logic and Computation, to appear. Revised and extended version of paper in Workshop Proceedings of Methods for Modalities 2.
Hasle, P., Øhrstrø m, P., Braüner, T., and Copeland, J., eds., 2002, Revised and Expanded Edition of Arthur N. Prior: Papers on Time and Tense, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Øhrstrø m, P. and Hasle, P., 1993, “A. N. Prior's rediscovery of tense logic, ” Erkenntnis 39, 23-50.
Prawitz, D., 1965, Natural Deduction. A Proof-Theoretical Study, Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Prawitz, D., 1971, “Ideas and results in proof theory, ” pp. 235-307 in Proceedings of the Second Scandinavian Logic Symposium, J.E. Fenstad, ed., Studies in Logic and The Foundations of Mathematics, Vol. 63, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Prior, A., 1967, Past, Present and Future, Oxford: Clarendon/Oxford University Press.
Prior, A., 1968, Papers on Time and Tense, Oxford: Clarendon/Oxford University Press.
Seligman, J., 1997, “The logic of correct description, ” pp. 107-135 in Advances in Intensional Logic, M. de Rijke, ed., Applied Logic Series, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Seligman, J., 2001, “Internalisation: The case of hybrid logics, ” Journal of Logic and Computation 11, 671-689. Special Issue on Hybrid Logics, C. Areces and P. Blackburn, eds.
Troelstra, A.S. and Schwichtenberg, H., 1996, Basic Proof Theory, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 43, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Braüner, T. Two Natural Deduction Systems for Hybrid Logic: A Comparison. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13, 1–23 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026187215321
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026187215321