Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:46:21.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Linear reasoning in modal logic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Melvin Fitting*
Affiliation:
Herbert H. Lehman College, Bronx, New York 10468

Extract

In [1] Craig introduced a proof procedure for first order classical logic called linear reasoning. In it, a proof of PQ consists of a sequence of formulas, each of which implies the next, beginning with P and ending with Q. And one of the formulas in the sequence will be an interpolation formula for PQ. Indeed, this was the first proof of the Craig interpolation theorem, some of whose important consequences were demonstrated in a companion paper [2]. In this paper we present systems of linear reasoning for several standard modal logics: K, T, K4, S4, D, D4, and GL. Similar systems can be constructed for several regular, nonnormal modal logics too, though we do not do so here. And just as in the classical case, interpolation theorems are easy consequences. Such theorems are well known for the logics considered here. There is a model theoretic argument in [6], an argument using Gentzen systems in [8], an argument using consistency properties in [4] and [5], and an argument using symmetric Gentzen systems in [5]. This paper presents what seems to be the first modal proof that follows Craig's original methods. We note that if the modal rules given here are dropped, a classical linear reasoning system results, which is related to, but not the same as those in [1] and [10].

Since the basic linear reasoning ideas are fully illustrated by the propositional case, we present that first, to keep the clutter down. Later we show how the techniques can generally be extended to encompass quantifiers. We do not follow [1] in making heavy use of prenex form, since it is not generally available in modal logics. Fortunately, it plays no essential role.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1984

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]Craig, W., Linear reasoning. A new form of the Herbrand-Gentzen theorem, this Journal vol. 22 (1957), pp. 250268Google Scholar
[2]Craig, W., Three uses of the Herbrand-Gentzen theorem in relating model theory to proof theory, this Journal, vol. 22 (1957), pp. 269285.Google Scholar
[3]Fine, K., Failure of the interpolation lemma in quantified model logic, this Journal, vol. 44 (1979), pp. 201206.Google Scholar
[4]Fitting, M., Model existence theorems for modal and intuitionistic logics, this Journal, vol. 38 (1973), pp. 613627.Google Scholar
[5]Fitting, M., Proof methods for modal and intuitionistic logics, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Gabbay, D., Craig's interpolation theorem for modal logics, Conference in Mathematical Logic–London '70, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 255, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1972, pp. 111127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Kripke, S., Semantical considerations for modal logics, Proceedings of a Colloquium on modal and many-valued logics, Helsinki, 23–26 August, 1962 Acta Philosophica Fennica, 1963, pp. 8394.Google Scholar
[8]Leivant, D., On the proof theory of the modal logic for arithmetic provability, this Journal, vol. 46 (1981), pp. 531538.Google Scholar
[9]Smullyan, R., A unifying principle in quantification theory, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 49 (1963), pp. 828832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Smullyan, R., First-order logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar