Gentzen writes in the published version of his doctoral thesis Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen that he was able to prove the normalization theorem only for intuitionistic natural deduction, but not for classical. To cover the latter, he developed classical sequent calculus and proved a corresponding theorem, the famous cut elimination result. Its proof was organized so that a cut elimination result for an intuitionistic sequent calculus came out as a special case, namely the one (...) in which the sequents have at most one formula in the right, succedent part. Thus, there was no need for a direct proof of normalization for intuitionistic natural deduction. The only traces of such a proof in the published thesis are some convertibilities, such as when an implication introduction is followed by an implication elimination [1934–35, II.5.13]. It remained to Dag Prawitz in 1965 to work out a proof of normalization. Another, less known proof was given also in 1965 by Andres Raggio.We found in February 2005 an early handwritten version of Gentzen's thesis, with exactly the above title, but with rather different contents: Most remarkably, it contains a detailed proof of normalization for what became the standard system of natural deduction. The manuscript is located in the Paul Bernays collection at the ETH-Zurichwith the signum Hs. 974: 271. Bernays must have gotten it well before the time of his being expelled from Göttingen on the basis of the racial laws in April 1933. (shrink)

Gentzens natural deduction. Thereby the appearance of the cuts in translation is explained.

The variety \ of semi-Heyting algebras was introduced by H. P. Sankappanavar [13] as an abstraction of the variety of Heyting algebras. Semi-Heyting algebras are the algebraic models for a logic HsH, known as semi-intuitionistic logic, which is equivalent to the one defined by a Hilbert style calculus in Cornejo :9–25, 2011) [6]. In this article we introduce a Gentzen style sequent calculus GsH for the semi-intuitionistic logic whose associated logic GsH is the same as HsH. (...) The advantage of this presentation of the logic is that we can prove a cut-elimination theorem for GsH that allows us to prove the decidability of the logic. As a direct consequence, we also obtain the decidability of the equational theory of semi-Heyting algebras. (shrink)

We consider four natural deduction systems: Fitch-style systems, Gentzen-style systems (in the form of dags), general deduction Frege systems and nested deduction Frege systems, as well as dag-like Gentzen-style sequent calculi. All these calculi soundly and completely formalize classical propositional logic. -/- We show that general deduction Frege systems and Gentzen-style natural calculi provide at most quadratic speedup over nested deduction Frege systems and Fitch-style natural calculi and at most cubic speedup over Gentzen-style sequent (...) calculi. (shrink)

Intuitionistic modal logics are extensions of intuitionistic propositional logic with modal axioms. We treat with two modal languages ${\mathscr{L}}_\Diamond $ and $\mathscr{L}_{\Diamond,\Box }$ which extend the intuitionistic propositional language with $\Diamond $ and $\Diamond,\Box $, respectively. Gentzen sequent calculi are established for several intuitionistic modal logics. In particular, we introduce a Gentzen sequent calculus for the well-known intuitionistic modal logic $\textsf{MIPC}$. These sequent calculi admit cut elimination and subformula property. They are decidable.

Gentzen writes in the published version of his doctoral thesis Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen that he was able to prove the normalization theorem only for intuitionistic natural deduction, but not for classical. To cover the latter, he developed classical sequent calculus and proved a corresponding theorem, the famous cut elimination result. Its proof was organized so that a cut elimination result for an intuitionistic sequent calculus came out as a special case, namely the one (...) in which the sequents have at most one formula in the right, succedent part. Thus, there was no need for a direct proof of normalization for intuitionistic natural deduction. The only traces of such a proof in the published thesis are some convertibilities, such as when an implication introduction is followed by an implication elimination [1934–35, II.5.13]. It remained to Dag Prawitz in 1965 to work out a proof of normalization. Another, less known proof was given also in 1965 by Andres Raggio.We found in February 2005 an early handwritten version of Gentzen's thesis, with exactly the above title, but with rather different contents: Most remarkably, it contains a detailed proof of normalization for what became the standard system of natural deduction. The manuscript is located in the Paul Bernays collection at the ETH-Zurichwith the signum Hs. 974: 271. Bernays must have gotten it well before the time of his being expelled from Göttingen on the basis of the racial laws in April 1933. (shrink)

The paper contains an exposition of some non standard approach to gentzenization of modal logics. The first section is devoted to short discussion of desirable properties of Gentzen systems and the short review of various sequential systems for modal logics. Two non standard, cut-free sequent systems are then presented, both based on the idea of using special modal sequents, in addition to usual ones. First of them, GSC I is well suited for nonsymmetric modal logics The second one, (...) GSC II is devised specially for symmetric, i.e. Blogics. GSC I and GSC II are not different formalizations, from the theoretical point of view GSC I may be seen as a simplification of the more general approach present in GSC II. They are considered separately, mainly because Blogics demand different, and more complicated, strategy in completeness proof, whereas non symmetric logics are easily and uniformly characterised by means of Fitting's Consistency Properties. The weakest modal logic captured by this formalization is minimal regular logic C, but many stronger logics are obtainable by addition of suitable structural rules, which conforms to Do en's methodology. Both variants of GSC satisfy also other, besides cut-freedom, desirable properties. (shrink)

Gentzen’s approach to deductive systems, and Carnap’s and Popper’s treatment of probability in logic were two fruitful ideas that appeared in logic of the mid-twentieth century. By combining these two concepts, the notion of sentence probability, and the deduction relation formalized in the sequent calculus, we introduce the notion of ’probabilized sequent’ \ with the intended meaning that “the probability of truthfulness of \ belongs to the interval [a, b]”. This method makes it possible to define (...) a system of derivations based on ’axioms’ of the form \, obtained as a result of empirical research, and then infer conclusions of the form \. We discuss the consistency, define the models, and prove the soundness and completeness for the defined probabilized sequent calculus. (shrink)

Quasi-Boolean modal algebras are quasi-Boolean algebras with a modal operator satisfying the interaction axiom. Sequential quasi-Boolean modal logics and the relational semantics are introduced. Kripke-completeness for some quasi-Boolean modal logics is shown by the canonical model method. We show that every descriptive persistent quasi-Boolean modal logic is canonical. The finite model property of some quasi-Boolean modal logics is proved. A cut-free Gentzen sequent calculus for the minimal quasi-Boolean logic is developed and we show that it has the (...) Craig interpolation property. (shrink)

We introduce a dual-context style sequent calculus which is complete with respectto Kripke semantics where implication is interpreted as strict implication in the modal logic K. The cut-elimination theorem for this calculus is proved by a variant of Gentzen's method.

The tetravalent modal logic is one of the two logics defined by Font and Rius :481–518, 2000) in connection with Monteiro’s tetravalent modal algebras. These logics are expansions of the well-known Belnap–Dunn’s four-valued logic that combine a many-valued character with a modal character. In fact, $${\mathcal {TML}}$$ TML is the logic that preserves degrees of truth with respect to tetravalent modal algebras. As Font and Rius observed, the connection between the logic $${\mathcal {TML}}$$ TML and the algebras is not so (...) good as in $${{\mathcal {TML}}}^N$$ TML N, but, as a compensation, it has a better proof-theoretic behavior, since it has a strongly adequate Gentzen calculus :481–518, 2000). In this work, we prove that the sequent calculus given by Font and Rius does not enjoy the cut-elimination property. Then, using a general method proposed by Avron et al., we provide a sequent calculus for $${\mathcal {TML}}$$ TML with the cut-elimination property. Finally, inspired by the latter, we present a natural deduction system, sound and complete with respect to the tetravalent modal logic. (shrink)

I present a sequent calculus that extends a nonmonotonic reflexive consequence relation as defined over an atomic first-order language without variables to one defined over a logically complex first-order language. The extension preserves reflexivity, is conservative (therefore nonmonotonic) and supraintuitionistic, and is conducted in a way that lets us codify, within the logically extended object language, important features of the base thus extended. In other words, the logical operators in this calculus play what Brandom (2008) calls expressive (...) roles. Expressivist logical systems have already been proposed for propositional logics (see Hlobil, 2016, and Kaplan, 2018) but not for first-order logics. An advantage of this calculus over standard first-order calculi (e.g., those in Gentzen, 1935/1964) is that universally quantified variables behave as they should even in the presence of arbitrary nonlogical axioms. I claim that because of this robust well-behavedness of variables, this calculus also provides logical inferentialists with a way to understand the meanings of variables in terms of the roles those variables play in a wide range of inferences that is not limited to purely logical ones (e.g, mathematical inferences). (shrink)

Gentzen’s classical sequent calculus has explicit structural rules for contraction and weakening. They can be absorbed by replacing the axiom P,¬P by Γ,P,¬P for any context Γ, and replacing the original disjunction rule with Γ,A,B implies Γ,AB.This paper presents a classical sequent calculus which is also free of contraction and weakening, but more symmetrically: both contraction and weakening are absorbed into conjunction, leaving the axiom rule intact. It uses a blended conjunction rule, combining the standard (...) context-sharing and context-splitting rules: Γ,Δ,A and Γ,Σ,B implies Γ,Δ,Σ,AB. We refer to this system as minimal sequent calculus.We prove a minimality theorem for the propositional fragment : any propositional sequent calculus S is complete if and only if S contains. Thus one can view as a minimal complete core of Gentzen’s. (shrink)

We provide a logical matrix semantics and a Gentzen-style sequent calculus for the first-degree entailments valid in W. T. Parry’s logic of Analytic Implication. We achieve the former by introducing a logical matrix closely related to that inducing paracomplete weak Kleene logic, and the latter by presenting a calculus where the initial sequents and the left and right rules for negation are subject to linguistic constraints.

Gentzen's “Untersuchungen” [1] gave a translation from natural deduction to sequent calculus with the property that normal derivations may translate into derivations with cuts. Prawitz in [8] gave a translation that instead produced cut-free derivations. It is shown that by writing all elimination rules in the manner of disjunction elimination, with an arbitrary consequence, an isomorphic translation between normal derivations and cut-free derivations is achieved. The standard elimination rules do not permit a full normal form, which explains (...) the cuts in Gentzen's translation. Likewise, it is shown that Prawitz' translation contains an implicit process of cut elimination. (shrink)

We explore the consequences, for logical system-building, of taking seriously the aim of having irredundant rules of inference, and a preference for proofs of stronger results over proofs of weaker ones. This leads one to reconsider the structural rules of REFLEXIVITY, THINNING, and CUT. REFLEXIVITY survives in the minimally necessary form $\varphi:\varphi$. Proofs have to get started. CUT is subject to a CUT-elimination theorem, to the effect that one can always make do without applications of CUT. So CUT is redundant, (...) and should not be a rule of the system. CUT-elimination, however, in the context of the usual forms of logical rules, requires the presence, in the system, of THINNING. But THINNING, it turns out, is not really necessary. Provided only that one liberalizes the statement of certain logical rules in an appropriate way, one can make do without CUT or THINNING. From the methodological point of view of this study, the logical rules ought to be framed in this newly liberalized form. These liberalized logical rules determine the system of core logic. Given any intuitionistic Gentzen proof of $\Delta:\varphi$, one can determine from it a Core proof of some subsequent of $\Delta:\varphi$. Given any classical Gentzen proof of $\Delta:\varphi$, one can determine from it a classical Core proof of some subsequent of $\Delta:\varphi$. In both cases the Core proof is of a result at least as strong as that of the Gentzen proof; and the only structural rule used is $\varphi:\varphi$. (shrink)

The interpretation of implications as rules motivates a different left-introduction schema for implication in the sequent calculus, which is conceptually more basic than the implication-left schema proposed by Gentzen. Corresponding to results obtained for systems with higher-level rules, it enjoys the subformula property and cut elimination in a weak form.

The logical formalism of abductive reasoning is still an open discussion and various theories have been presented about it. Abduction is a type of non-monotonic and defeasible reasonings, and the logic containing such a reasoning is one of the types of non-nonmonotonic and defeasible logics, such as inductive logic. Abduction is a kind of natural reasoning and it is a solution to the problems having this form "the phenomenon of φ cannot be explained by the theory of Θ" and we (...) need to search for (or to adduce) an explanation for φ. Taking α as the explanation and <Θ,φ> as the abductive problem, Θ∪{α}⊨φ is the logical format of a strong abductive reasoning. In this article, the proof theory for first-order abductive calculus is proposed based on Gentzen-type first-order proof theory. Considering its dual, i.e., the semantic tableaux, and without the need to translate the formulas, this calculation is sound and complete. After examining the structural rules of this calculus, some metalogical considerations and open problems such as consistency, completeness and undecidability of this account have been addressed. (shrink)

In their paper Nothing but the Truth Andreas Pietz and Umberto Rivieccio present Exactly True Logic, an interesting variation upon the four-valued logic for first-degree entailment FDE that was given by Belnap and Dunn in the 1970s. Pietz & Rivieccio provide this logic with a Hilbert-style axiomatisation and write that finding a nice sequent calculus for the logic will presumably not be easy. But a sequent calculus can be given and in this paper we will show (...) that a calculus for the Belnap-Dunn logic we have defined earlier can in fact be reused for the purpose of characterising ETL, provided a small alteration is made—initial assignments of signs to the sentences of a sequent to be proved must be different from those used for characterising FDE. While Pietz & Rivieccio define ETL on the language of classical propositional logic we also study its consequence relation on an extension of this language that is functionally complete for the underlying four truth values. On this extension the calculus gets a multiple-tree character—two proof trees may be needed to establish one proof. (shrink)

Gentzen-type sequent calculi GBD+, GBDe, GBD1, and GBD2 are respectively introduced for De and Omori’s axiomatic extensions BD+, BDe, BD1, and BD2 of Belnap–Dunn logic by adding classical negation. These calculi are constructed based on a small modification of the original characteristic axiom scheme for negated implication. Theorems for syntactically and semantically embedding these calculi into a Gentzen-type sequent calculus LK for classical logic are proved. The cut-elimination, decidability, and completeness theorems for these calculi are (...) obtained using these embedding theorems. Similar results excluding cut-elimination results are also obtained for alternative Gentzen-type sequent calculi gBD+, gBDe, gBD1, and gBD2 for BD+, BDe, BD1, and BD2, respectively. These alternative calculi are constructed based on the original characteristic axiom scheme for negated implication. (shrink)

We introduce a Gentzen-style sequent calculus axiomatization for Basic Predicate Calculus. Our new axiomatization is an improvement of the previous axiomatizations, in the sense that it has the subformula property. In this system the cut rule is eliminated.

This paper contends that Stoic logic (i.e. Stoic analysis) deserves more attention from contemporary logicians. It sets out how, compared with contemporary propositional calculi, Stoic analysis is closest to methods of backward proof search for Gentzen-inspired substructural sequent logics, as they have been developed in logic programming and structural proof theory, and produces its proof search calculus in tree form. It shows how multiple similarities to Gentzen sequent systems combine with intriguing dissimilarities that may enrich (...) contemporary discussion. Much of Stoic logic appears surprisingly modern: a recursively formulated syntax with some truth-functional propositional operators; analogues to cut rules, axiom schemata and Gentzen’s negation-introduction rules; an implicit variable-sharing principle and deliberate rejection of Thinning and avoidance of paradoxes of implication. These latter features mark the system out as a relevance logic, where the absence of duals for its left and right introduction rules puts it in the vicinity of McCall’s connexive logic. Methodologically, the choice of meticulously formulated meta-logical rules in lieu of axiom and inference schemata absorbs some structural rules and results in an economical, precise and elegant system that values decidability over completeness. (shrink)

We introduce a Gentzen style formulation of Basic Propositional Calculus(BPC), the logic that is interpreted in Kripke models similarly tointuitionistic logic except that the accessibility relation of eachmodel is not necessarily reflexive. The formulation is presented as adual-context style system, in which the left hand side of a sequent isdivided into two parts. Giving an interpretation of the sequents inKripke models, we show the soundness and completeness of the system withrespect to the class of Kripke models. The (...) cut-elimination theorem isproved in a syntactic way by modifying Gentzen's method. Thisdual-context style system exemplifies the effectiveness of dual-contextformulation in formalizing various non-classical logics. (shrink)

We introduce a sequent system which is Gentzen algebraisable with orthomodular lattices as equivalent algebraic semantics, and therefore can be viewed as a calculus for orthomodular quantum logic. Its sequents are pairs of non-associative structures, formed via a structural connective whose algebraic interpretation is the Sasaki product on the left-hand side and its De Morgan dual on the right-hand side. It is a substructural calculus, because some of the standard structural sequent rules are restricted—by lifting (...) all such restrictions, one recovers a calculus for classical logic. (shrink)

The primary objective of this paper, which is an addendum to the author’s [8], is to apply the general study of the latter to Łukasiewicz’s n-valued logics [4]. The paper provides an analytical expression of a 2(n−1)-place sequent calculus (in the sense of [10, 9]) with the cut-elimination property and a strong completeness with respect to the logic involved which is most compact among similar calculi in the sense of a complexity of systems of premises of introduction rules. (...) This together with a quite effective procedure of construction of an equality determinant (in the sense of [5]) for the logics involved to be extracted from the constructive proof of Proposition 6.10 of [6] yields an equally effective procedure of construction of both Gentzen-style [2] (i.e., 2-place) and Tait-style [11] (i.e., 1-place) minimal sequent calculi following the method of translations described in Subsection 4.2 of [7]. (shrink)

In this study, an extended paradefinite logic with classical negation (EPLC), which has the connectives of conflation, paraconsistent negation, classical negation, and classical implication, is introduced as a Gentzen-type sequent calculus. The logic EPLC is regarded as a modification of Arieli, Avron, and Zamansky’s ideal four-valued paradefinite logic (4CC) and as an extension of De and Omori’s extended Belnap–Dunn logic with classical negation (BD+) and Avron’s self-extensional four-valued paradefinite logic (SE4). The completeness, cut-elimination, and decidability theorems for (...) EPLC are proved and EPLC is shown to be embeddable into classical logic. The strong equivalence substitution property and the admissibilities of the rules of negative symmetry, contraposition, and involution are shown for EPLC. Some alternative simple Gentzen-type sequent calculi, which are theorem-equivalent to EPLC, are obtained via these characteristic properties. (shrink)

We see a systematic set of cut-free axiomatisations for all the basic normal modal logics formed by some combination the axioms d, t, b, 4, 5. They employ a form of deep inference but otherwise stay very close to Gentzen’s sequent calculus, in particular they enjoy a subformula property in the literal sense. No semantic notions are used inside the proof systems, in particular there is no use of labels. All their rules are invertible and the rules (...) cut, weakening and contraction are admissible. All systems admit a straightforward terminating proof search procedure as well as a syntactic cut elimination procedure. (shrink)

Gentzen’s sequent calculi LK and LJ are landmark proof systems. They identify the structural rules of weakening and contraction as notable inference rules, and they allow for an elegant statement and proof of both cut elimination and consistency for classical and intuitionistic logics. Among the undesirable features of those sequent calculi is that their inferences rules are low-level and frequently permute over each other. As a result, large-scale structures within sequent calculus proofs are hard to (...) identify. In this paper, we present a different approach to designing a sequent calculus for classical logic. Starting with Gentzen’s LK proof system, we examine the proof search meaning of his inference rules and classify those rules as involving either don’t care nondeterminism or don’t know nondeterminism. Based on that classification, we design the focused proof system LKF in which inference rules belong to one of two phases of proof construction depending on which flavor of nondeterminism they involve. We then prove that the cut rule and the general form of the initial rule are admissible in LKF. Finally, by showing that the inference rules for LK are all admissible in LKF, we can give a relative completeness proof for LKF provability with respect to LK provability. We shall also apply these properties of the LKF proof system to establish other meta-theoretic properties of classical logic, including Herbrand’s theorem. (shrink)

Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a multi-modal logic for reasoning about the change of knowledge in multi-agent systems. It extends epistemic logic by a modal operator for actions which announce logical formulas to other agents. In Hilbert-style proof calculi for DEL, modal action formulas are reduced to epistemic logic, whereas current sequent calculi for DEL are labelled systems which internalize the semantic accessibility relation of the modal operators, as well as the accessibility relation underlying the semantics of the actions. (...) We present a novel cut-free ordinary sequent calculus, called |$ \textbf{G4}_{P,A}[] $|⁠, for propositional DEL. In contrast to the known sequent calculi, our calculus does not internalize the accessibility relations, but—similar to Hilbert style proof calculi—action formulas are reduced to epistemic formulas. Since no ordinary sequent calculus for full S5 modal logic is known, the proof rules for the knowledge operator and the Boolean operators are those of an underlying S4 modal calculus. We show the soundness and completeness of |$ \textbf{G4}_{P,A}[] $| and prove also the admissibility of the cut-rule and of several other rules for introducing the action modality. (shrink)

Gentzen's systems of natural deduction and sequent calculus were byproducts in his program of proving the consistency of arithmetic and analysis. It is suggested that the central component in his results on logical calculi was the use of a tree form for derivations. It allows the composition of derivations and the permutation of the order of application of rules, with a full control over the structure of derivations as a result. Recently found documents shed new light on (...) the discovery of these calculi. In particular, Gentzen set up five different forms of natural calculi and gave a detailed proof of normalization for intuitionistic natural deduction. An early handwritten manuscript of his thesis shows that a direct translation from natural deduction to the axiomatic logic of Hilbert and Ackermann was, in addition to the influence of Paul Hertz, the second component in the discovery of sequent calculus. A system intermediate between the sequent calculus LI and axiomatic logic, denoted LIG in unpublished sources, is implicit in Gentzen's published thesis of 1934—35. The calculus has half rules, half “groundsequents,” and does not allow full cut elimination. Nevertheless, a translation from LI to LIG in the published thesis gives a subformula property for a complete class of derivations in LIG. After the thesis, Gentzen continued to work on variants of sequent calculi for ten more years, in the hope to find a consistency proof for arithmetic within an intuitionistic calculus. (shrink)

This paper gives a Gentzen-style proof of the consistency of Heyting arithmetic in an intuitionistic sequent calculus with explicit rules of weakening, contraction and cut. The reductions of the proof, which transform derivations of a contradiction into less complex derivations, are based on a method for direct cut-elimination without the use of multicut. This method treats contractions by tracing up from contracted cut formulas to the places in the derivation where each occurrence was first introduced. Thereby, (...) class='Hi'>Gentzen’s heightline argument, which introduces additional cuts on contracted compound cut formulas, is avoided. To show termination of the reduction procedure an ordinal assignment based on techniques of Howard for Gödel’s T is used. (shrink)

We introduce two Gentzen-style sequent calculus axiomatizations for conservative extensions of basic propositional logic. Our first axiomatization is an ipmrovement of, in the sense that it has a kind of the subformula property and is a slight modification of. In this system the cut rule is eliminated. The second axiomatization is a classical conservative extension of basic propositional logic. Using these axiomatizations, we prove interpolation theorems for basic propositional logic.

Gentzen writes in the published version of his doctoral thesis Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen that he was able to prove the normalization theorem only for intuitionistic natural deduction, but not for classical. To cover the latter, he developed classical sequent calculus and proved a corresponding theorem, the famous cut elimination result. Its proof was organized so that a cut elimination result for an intuitionistic sequent calculus came out as a special case, namely the one (...) in which the sequents have at most one formula in the right, succedent part. Thus, there was no need for a direct proof of normalization for intuitionistic natural deduction. The only traces of such a proof in the published thesis are some convertibilities, such as when an implication introduction is followed by an implication elimination [1934–35, II.5.13]. It remained to Dag Prawitz in 1965 to work out a proof of normalization. Another, less known proof was given also in 1965 by Andres Raggio.We found in February 2005 an early handwritten version of Gentzen's thesis, with exactly the above title, but with rather different contents: Most remarkably, it contains a detailed proof of normalization for what became the standard system of natural deduction. The manuscript is located in the Paul Bernays collection at the ETH-Zurichwith the signum Hs. 974: 271. Bernays must have gotten it well before the time of his being expelled from Göttingen on the basis of the racial laws in April 1933. (shrink)

When considering m-sequents, it is always possible to obtain an m-sequent calculus VL for every m-valued logic (defined from an arbitrary finite algebra L of cardinality m) following for instance the works of the Vienna Group for Multiple-valued Logics. The Gentzen relations associated with the calculi VL are always finitely equivalential but might not be algebraizable. In this paper we associate an algebraizable 2-Gentzen relation with every sequent calculus VL in a uniform way, provided (...) the original algebra L has a reduct that is a distributive lattice or a pseudocomplemented distributive lattice. We also show that the sentential logic naturally associated with the provable sequents of this algebraizable Gentzen relation is the logic that preserves degrees of truth with respect to the original algebra (in contrast with the more common logic that merely preserves truth). Finally, for some particular logics we obtain 2-sequent calculi that axiomatize the algebraizable Gentzen relations obtained so far. (shrink)

A contraction-free and cut-free sequent calculus \ for semi-De Morgan algebras, and a structural-rule-free and single-succedent sequent calculus \ for De Morgan algebras are developed. The cut rule is admissible in both sequent calculi. Both calculi enjoy the decidability and Craig interpolation. The sequent calculi are applied to prove some embedding theorems: \ is embedded into \ via Gödel–Gentzen translation. \ is embedded into a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. \ (...) is embedded into the sequent calculus \ for intuitionistic propositional logic. (shrink)

Any set of truth-functional connectives has sequent calculus rules that can be generated systematically from the truth tables of the connectives. Such a sequent calculus gives rise to a multi-conclusion natural deduction system and to a version of Parigot’s free deduction. The elimination rules are “general,” but can be systematically simplified. Cut-elimination and normalization hold. Restriction to a single formula in the succedent yields intuitionistic versions of these systems. The rules also yield generalized lambda calculi providing (...) proof terms for natural deduction proofs as in the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Addition of an indirect proof rule yields classical single-conclusion versions of these systems. Gentzen’s standard systems arise as special cases. (shrink)

Gerhard Gentzen has been described as logic’s lost genius, whom Gödel called a better logician than himself. This work comprises articles by leading proof theorists, attesting to Gentzen’s enduring legacy to mathematical logic and beyond. The contributions range from philosophical reflections and re-evaluations of Gentzen’s original consistency proofs to the most recent developments in proof theory. Gentzen founded modern proof theory. His sequent calculus and natural deduction system beautifully explain the deep symmetries of logic. (...) They underlie modern developments in computer science such as automated theorem proving and type theory. (shrink)

The paper is a brief survey of some sequent calculi which do not follow strictly the shape of sequent calculus introduced by Gentzen. We propose the following rough classification of all SC: Systems which are based on some deviations from the ordinary notion of a sequent are called generalised; remaining ones are called ordinary. Among the latter we distinguish three types according to the proportion between the number of primitive sequents and rules. In particular, in (...) one of these types, called Gentzen’s type, we have a subtype of standard SC due to Gentzen. Hence by nonstandard ones we mean all these ordinary SC where other kinds of rules are applied than those admitted in standard Gentzen’s sequent calculi. We describe briefly some of the most interesting or important nonstandard SC belonging to the three abovementioned types. (shrink)

Sequent calculi for trilattice logics, including those that are determined by the truth entailment, the falsity entailment and their intersection, are given. This partly answers the problems in Shramko-Wansing.

We discuss the methods for providing sequent calculi for Suszko’s basic non-Fregean Logic with sentential identity SCI. After examination of possible strategies and already proposed systems we focus on the new calculus and its modification. It does not satisfy full cut elimination but a slightly generalised form of the subformula property holds for it. It is also standard in the sense of satisfying several conditions on rules formulated by Gentzen and his followers. We examine also the problem (...) of providing a constructive proof of the interpolation theorem in the setting of this sequent calculus. (shrink)

We introduce a cyclic proof system for the two-way alternation-free modal μ-calculus. The system manipulates one-sided Gentzen sequents and locally deals with the backwards modalities by allowing analytic applications of the cut rule. The global effect of backwards modalities on traces is handled by making the semantics relative to a specific strategy of the opponent in the evaluation game. This allows us to augment sequents by so-called trace atoms, describing traces that the proponent can construct against the opponent’s (...) strategy. The idea for trace atoms comes from Vardi’s reduction of alternating two-way automata to deterministic one-way automata. Using the multi-focus annotations introduced earlier by Marti and Venema, we turn this trace-based system into a path-based system. We prove that our system is sound for all sequents and complete for sequents not containing trace atoms. (shrink)

In this paper, we study multiplicative extensions of propositional many-place sequent calculi for finitely-valued logics arising from those introduced in Sect. 5 of Pynko (J Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput 10:339–362, 2004) through their translation by means of singularity determinants for logics and restriction of the original many-place sequent language. Our generalized approach, first of all, covers, on a uniform formal basis, both the one developed in Sect. 5 of Pynko (J Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput 10:339–362, 2004) for singular (...) finitely-valued logics (when singularity determinants consist of a variable alone) and conventional Gentzen-style (i.e., two-place sequent) calculi suggested in Pynko (Bull Sect Logic 33(1):23–32, 2004) for finitely-valued logics with equality determinant. In addition, it provides a universal method of constructing Tait-style (i.e., one-place sequent) calculi for finitely-valued logics with singularity determinant (in particular, for Łukasiewicz finitely-valued logics) that fits the well-known Tait calculus (Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 1968) for the classical logic. We properly extend main results of Pynko (J Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput 10:339–362, 2004) and explore calculi under consideration within the framework of Sect. 7 of Pynko (Arch Math Logic 45:267–305, 2006), generalizing the results obtained in Sect. 7.5 of Pynko (Arch Math Logic 45:267–305 2006) for two-place sequent calculi associated with finitely-valued logics with equality determinant according to Pynko (Bull Sect Logic 33(1):23–32, 2004). We also exemplify our universal elaboration by applying it to some denumerable families of well-known finitely-valued logics. (shrink)

A theorem for embedding a first-order linear- time temporal logic LTL into its intuitionistic counterpart ILTL is proved using Baratella-Masini's temporal extension of the Gödel-Gentzen negative translation of classical logic into intuitionistic logic. A substructural counterpart LLTL of ILTL is introduced, and a theorem for embedding ILTL into LLTL is proved using a temporal extension of the Girard translation of intuitionistic logic into intuitionistic linear logic. These embedding theorems are proved syntactically based on Gentzen-type sequent calculi.

We provide a direct method for proving Craig interpolation for a range of modal and intuitionistic logics, including those containing a "converse" modality. We demonstrate this method for classical tense logic, its extensions with path axioms, and for bi-intuitionistic logic. These logics do not have straightforward formalisations in the traditional Gentzen-style sequent calculus, but have all been shown to have cut-free nested sequent calculi. The proof of the interpolation theorem uses these calculi and is purely syntactic, (...) without resorting to embeddings, semantic arguments, or interpreted connectives external to the underlying logical language. A novel feature of our proof includes an orthogonality condition for defining duality between interpolants. (shrink)