A Short and Readable Proof of Cut Elimination for Two First-Order Modal Logics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/0138-0680.44.3.4.03Keywords:
Modal logic, GL, QGL, first-order logic, proof theory, cut elimination, cut admissibility, provability logicAbstract
A well established technique toward developing the proof theory of a Hilbert-style modal logic is to introduce a Gentzen-style equivalent (a Gentzenisation), then develop the proof theory of the latter, and finally transfer the metatheoretical results to the original logic (e.g., [1, 6, 8, 18, 10, 12]). In the first-order modal case, on one hand we know that the Gentzenisation of the straightforward first-order extension of GL, the logic QGL, admits no cut elimination (if the rule is included as primitive; or, if not included, then the rule is not admissible [1]). On the other hand the (cut-free) Gentzenisations of the first-order modal logics M3 and ML3 of [10, 12] do have cut as an admissible rule. The syntactic cut admissibility proof given in [18] for the Gentzenisation of the propositional provability logic GL is extremely complex, and it was the basis of the proofs of cut admissibility of the Gentzenisations of M3 and ML3, where the presence of quantifiers and quantifier rules added to the complexity and length of the proof. A recent proof of cut admissibility in a cut-free Gentzenisation of GL is given in [5] and is quite short and easy to read. We adapt it here to revisit the proofs for the cases of M3 and ML3, resulting to similarly short and easy to read proofs, only slightly complicated by the presence of quantification and its relevant rules.
References
Avron A., On modal systems having arithmetical interpretations, J. of Symb. Logic 49, no. 3 (1984), pp. 935–942. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2274147
Barwise J. (ed.), Handbook of Mathematical Logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.
Boolos G., The Logic of Provability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625183
Bourbaki N., Éléments de Mathématique; Théorie des Ensembles, Hermann, Paris, 1966.
Brighton J., Cut Elimination for GLS Using the Terminability of its Regress Process, DOI 10.1007/s10992-015-9368-4, March 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-015-9368-4
Leivant D., On the proof theory of the modal logic for arithmetic provability, Journal of Symbolic Logic 46, no. 3 (1981), pp. 531–538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2273755
Montagna F., The predicate modal logic of provability, Notre Dame J. of Formal Logic 25 (1984), pp. 179–189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1305/ndjfl/1093870577
Sambin G., Valentini S., The Modal Logic of Provability. The Sequential Approach, Journal of Philosophical Logic 11, no. 3 (1982), pp. 311–342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00293433
Schütte K., Proof Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-66473-1
Schwartz Y., Tourlakis G., On the proof-theory of two formalisations of modal first-order logic, Studia Logica 96, no. 3 (2010), pp. 349–373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-010-9294-y
Schwartz Y., Tourlakis G., A Proof Theoretic Tool for First-Order Modal Logic, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 42:3/4 (2013), pp. 93–110.
Schwartz Y., Tourlakis G., On the Proof-Theory of a First-Order Version of GL, Logic and Logical Philosophy (LLP) 23, no. 3 (2014), pp. 329–363.
Schwichtenberg H., Proof theory: Some applications of cut-elimination, in Barwise [2], pp. 867–895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-237X(08)71124-8
Solovay R., Provability Interpretations of Modal Logics, Israel Journal of Mathematics 25 (1976), pp. 287–304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02757006
Tourlakis G., Some metatheoretical results about first-order modal logics, Submitted (In refereeing), October 2015.
Tourlakis G., Kibedi F., A modal extension of first order classical logic – Part I, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 32:4 (2003), pp. 165–178.
Tourlakis G., Kibedi F., A modal extension of first order classical logic – Part II, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 33:1 (2004), pp. 1–10.
Valentini S., The Modal Logic of Provability: Cut-Elimination, Journal of Philosophical Logic 12, no. 4 (1983), pp. 471–476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00249262
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.




