Abstract
This article answers two questions (posed in the literature), each concerning the guaranteed existence of proofs free of double negation. A proof is free of double negation if none of its deduced steps contains a term of the formn(n(t)) for some term t, where n denotes negation. The first question asks for conditions on the hypotheses that, if satisfied, guarantee the existence of a double-negation-free proof when the conclusion is free of double negation. The second question asks about the existence of an axiom system for classical propositional calculus whose use, for theorems with a conclusion free of double negation, guarantees the existence of a double-negation-free proof. After giving conditions that answer the first question, we answer the second question by focusing on the Lukasiewicz three-axiom system. We then extend our studies to infinite-valued sentential calculus and to intuitionistic logic and generalize the notion of being double-negation free. The double-negation proofs of interest rely exclusively on the inference rule condensed detachment, a rule that combines modus ponens with an appropriately general rule of substitution. The automated reasoning program Otter played an indispensable role in this study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
CHANG, C.C., ‘Algebraic analysis of many valued logics’, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 88:467–490, 1958.
FITELSON, B., and L. WOS, ‘Finding missing proofs with automated reasoning’, Studia Logica 68(3):329–356, 2001.
HINDLEY, J.R., and D. MEREDITH, ‘Principal type-schemes and condensed detachment’, J. Symbolic Logic 55(1):90–105, 1990.
HORN, A., ‘The separation theorem of intuitionist propositional calculus’, J. Symbolic Logic 27:391–399, 1962.
KLEENE, S.C., Introduction to Metamathematics, van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey, 1952.
MEREDITH, CA., and A. PRIOR, ‘Notes on the axiomatics of the propositional calculus‘, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 4:171–187, 1963.
McCUNE, W., Otter 3.3 Reference Manual, Tech. Memo ANL/MCS-TM-263, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, August 2003.
MINTS, G., and T. TAMMET, ‘Condensed detachment is complete for relevance logic: A computer-aided proof’, J. Automated Reasoning 7(4):587–596, 1991.
PRIJATELJ, A., ‘Bounded contraction and Gentzen-style formulation of Lukasiewicz logics’, Studia Logica 57(2–3):437–456, 1996.
PRIOR, A.N., ‘Logicians at play; or Syll, Simp, and Hilbert’, Australasian J. Phil. 34:182–192, 1956.
PRIOR, A.N., Formal Logic, 2nd edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1962.
ROBINSON, J., ‘A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle’, J. ACM 12:23–41, 1965.
ROSE, A., and J.B. ROSSER, ‘Fragments of many-valued statement calculi’, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 87:1–53, 1958.
THOMAS, I., ‘Shorter development of an axiom’, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 16:378, 1975.
ULRICH, D., ‘A legacy recalled and a tradition continued’, J. Automated Reasoning 27(2):97–122, 2001.
VEROFF, R., ‘Using hints to increase the effectiveness of an automated reasoning program: Case studies’, J. Automated Reasoning 16(3):223–239, 1996.
WOS, L., ‘The resonance strategy’, Computers and Mathematics with Applications 29(2):133–178, 1996.
WOS, L., ‘Conquering the Meredith single axiom’, J. Automated Reasoning 27(2):175–199, 2001.
WOS, L., and G. PIEPER, A Fascinating Country in the World of Computing: Your Guide to Automated Reasoning. World Scientific, Singapore, 1999.
WOS, L., and R. THIELE, ‘Hilbert's new problem’, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 30(3):165–175, 2001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beeson, M., Veroff, R. & Wos, L. Double-Negation Elimination in Some Propositional Logics. Stud Logica 80, 195–234 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-005-8469-4
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-005-8469-4