Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T13:29:53.466Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Analytic natural deduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Raymond M. Smullyan
Raymond M. Smullyan*
Affiliation:
Belfer Graduate School of Science, New York, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We consider some natural deduction systems for quantification theory whose only quantificational rules involve elimination of quantifiers. By imposing certain restrictions on the rules, we obtain a system which we term Analytic Natural Deduction; it has the property that the only formulas used in the proof of a given formula X are either subformulas of X, or negations of subformulas of X. By imposing further restrictions, we obtain a canonical procedure which is bound to terminate, if the formula being tested is valid. The procedure (ultimately in the spirit of Herbrand [1]) can be thought of as a partial linearization of the method of semantical tableaux [2], [3]. A further linearization leads to a variant of Gentzen's system which we shall study in a sequel.

The completeness theorem for semantical tableaux rests essentially on König's lemma on infinite graphs [4]. Our completeness theorem for natural deduction uses as a counterpart to König's lemma, a lemma on infinite “nest structures”, as they are to be defined. These structures can be looked at as the underlying combinatorial basis of a wide variety of natural deduction systems.

In § 1 we study these nest structures in complete abstraction from quantification theory; the results of this section are of a purely combinatorial nature. The applications to quantification theory are given in § 2.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , June 1965 , pp. 123 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Herbrand, J., Recherches sur la Théorie de la démonstration, Warsaw 1930.Google Scholar
[2]Beth, E. W., Semantic entailment and formal derivability, Mededelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. letterkunde, n.s. vol. 18, no. 13 (1955), pp. 309–342.Google Scholar
[3]Hintikka, K. J. J., Form and content in quantification theory, Acta Phllosophica Fennica no. 8, Helsinki 1955, pp. 7–55.Google Scholar
[4]König, D., Theorie der endlichen und unendlichen Graphen, Leipsig, 1932.Google Scholar
[5]Quine, W. V., Methods of Logic, 1959, Henry Holt and Co., Inc., New York.Google Scholar
[6]Smullyan, R. M., A unifying principle in quantification theory, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 06 1963.Google Scholar