Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

UNIFORM INTERPOLATION IN SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2014

MAJID ALIZADEH
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, College of Science, University of Tehran
FARZANEH DERAKHSHAN
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, College of Science, University of Tehran
HIROAKIRA ONO
Affiliation:
Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

Abstract

Uniform interpolation property of a given logic is a stronger form of Craig’s interpolation property where both pre-interpolant and post-interpolant always exist uniformly for any provable implication in the logic. It is known that there exist logics, e.g., modal propositional logic S4, which have Craig’s interpolation property but do not have uniform interpolation property. The situation is even worse for predicate logics, as classical predicate logic does not have uniform interpolation property as pointed out by L. Henkin.

In this paper, uniform interpolation property of basic substructural logics is studied by applying the proof-theoretic method introduced by A. Pitts (Pitts, 1992). It is shown that uniform interpolation property holds even for their predicate extensions, as long as they can be formalized by sequent calculi without contraction rules. For instance, uniform interpolation property of full Lambek predicate calculus, i.e., the substructural logic without any structural rule, and of both linear and affine predicate logics without exponentials are proved.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Bílková, M. (2007). Uniform interpolation and propositional quantifiers in modal logics. Studia Logica, 85, 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Agostino, G. (2008). Interpolation in non-classical logics. Synthese, 164, 421435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dardžaniá, G. K. (1977). Intuitionistic system without contraction. Bulletin of the Section of Logic, 6, 28.Google Scholar
Došen, K. (1988). Sequent systems and groupoid models I. Studia Logica, 47, 353385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyckhoff, R. (1992). Contraction-free sequent calculi for intuitionistic logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 78, 795807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galatos, N., Jipsen, P., Kowalski, T., & Ono, H. (2007). Residuated Lattices: An Algebraic Glimpse at Substructural Logics, Vol. 151, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 532 pp.Google Scholar
Ghilardi, S., & Zawadowski, M. (1995a). A sheaf representation and duality for finitely presented Heyting algebras. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 60, 911939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghilardi, S., & Zawadowski, M. (1995b). Undefinability of propositional quantifiers in the modal system S4. Studia Logica, 55, 259271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard, J.-Y. (1987). Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 50, 1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grišin, V. N. (1982). Predicate and set-theoretical calculi based on logic without the contraction rule. Mathematical USSR Izvestiya, 18, 4150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henkin, L. (1963). An extension of the Craig-Lyndon interpolation theorem. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 28, 201216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heuerding, A. (1998). Sequent calculi for proof search in some modal logics. Ph. D. thesis, University of Bern.
Hudelmaier, J. (1989). Bounds for cut elimination in intuitionistic propositional logic. PhD Thesis, University of Tübingen.
Idziak, P. M. (1984). Lattice operations in BCK-algebras. PhD Thesis, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Kanger, S. (1957). Provability in Logic, Stockholm Studies in Philosophy 1. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Kiriyama, E., & Ono, H. (1991). The contraction rule and decision problems for logics without structural rules. Studia Logica, 50, 299319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komori, Y. (1986). Predicate logics without the structure rules. Studia Logica, 45,393404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambek, J. (1958). The mathematics of sentence structures. American Mathematical Monthly, 65, 154170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maehara, S. (1960). On the interpolation theorem of Craig (Japanese). Sugaku, 12, 235237.Google Scholar
Montagna, F. (2012). ∆-core fuzzy logics with propositional quantifiers, quantifier elimination and uniform Craig interpolation. Studia Logica, 100, 289317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ono, H. (1990). Structural rules and a logical hierarchy. In Petkov, P. P., editor. Mathematical Logic. London: Plenum, pp. 95104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ono, H. (1998). Proof-theoretic methods for nonclassical logic – An introduction. In Takahashi, M., Okada, M., and Dezani-Ciancaglini, M., editors, Theories of Types and Proofs, MSJ Memoirs 2. Tokyo: Mathematical Society of Japan, pp. 207254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ono, H., & Komori, Y. (1985). Logics without the contraction rule. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50, 169201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitts, A. M. (1992). On an interpretation of second order quantification in first order intuitionistic propositional logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 57, 3352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamura, S. (1974). On a decision procedure for free lo-algebraic systems. Technical report of Mathematics, Yamaguchi University 9.
Troelstra, A. S. (1992). Lectures on Linear Logic, Vol. 29, Lecture Notes. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
van Benthem, J. (2008). The many faces of interpolation. Synthese, 164, 451460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, A. (1996). Uniform interpolation and layered bisimulation. In Hájek, P., editor. Lecture Notes in Logic 6 “Gödel ’96: Logical foundations of mathematics, computer science and physics — Kurt Gödel’s legacy”. Berlin: Springer, pp. 139164.Google Scholar
Wang, H. (1963). A Survey of Mathematical Logic, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 81 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 27th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-898fc554b-r79h5 Total loading time: 0.331 Render date: 2021-01-27T11:10:00.732Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

UNIFORM INTERPOLATION IN SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

UNIFORM INTERPOLATION IN SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

UNIFORM INTERPOLATION IN SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *