Invited Talk: On a (Quite) Universal Theorem Proving Approach and Its Application in Metaphysics

Classical higher-order logic is suited as a meta-logic in which a range of other logics can be elegantly embedded. Interactive and automated theorem provers for higher-order logic are therefore readily applicable. By employing this approach, the automation of a variety of ambitious logics has recently been pioneered, including variants of first-order and higher-order quantified multimodal logics and conditional logics. Moreover, the approach supports the automation of meta-level reasoning, and it sheds some new light on meta-theoretical results such as cut-elimination. Most importantly, however, the approach is relevant for practice: it has recently been successfully applied in a series of experiments in metaphysics in which higher-order theorem provers have actually contributed some new knowledge.

[1]  Christoph Benzmüller,et al.  Implementing and Evaluating Provers for First-order Modal Logics , 2012, ECAI.

[2]  Christoph Benzmüller Cut-free Calculi for Challenge Logics in a Lazy Way , 2013, LICS 2013.

[3]  Christoph Benzmüller,et al.  Combining and automating classical and non-classical logics in classical higher-order logics , 2011, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[4]  Christoph Benzmüller HOL Provers for First-order Modal Logics - Experiments , 2014, ARQNL@IJCAR.

[5]  Alan Bundy,et al.  The Use of Explicit Plans to Guide Inductive Proofs , 1988, CADE.

[6]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Embedding and automating conditional logics in classical higher-order logic , 2012, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[7]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Exploring Properties of Normal Multimodal Logics in Simple Type Theory with LEO-II , 2008 .

[8]  Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo,et al.  Computer-Assisted Analysis of the Anderson–Hájek Ontological Controversy , 2017, Logica Universalis.

[9]  Pierre Castéran,et al.  Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development , 2004, Texts in Theoretical Computer Science An EATCS Series.

[10]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Chapter 13 – Labelled Deductive Systems , 2003 .

[11]  Christoph Benzmüller Automating Access Control Logics in Simple Type Theory with LEO-II (Techreport) , 2009, SEC.

[12]  Alexander Steen,et al.  Embedding of Quantified Higher-Order Nominal Modal Logic into Classical Higher-Order Logic , 2014, ARQNL@IJCAR.

[13]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Quantified Multimodal Logics in Simple Type Theory , 2009, Logica Universalis.

[14]  Dale Miller,et al.  Automation of Higher-Order Logic , 2014, Computational Logic.

[15]  Christoph Benzm,et al.  Automating Quantified Conditional Logics in HOL , 2013 .

[16]  Philip Scott Practical lambing and lamb care, A. Eales, J. Small, C. Macaldowie (Eds.). Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford (2004), 272, (soft), £24.99, ISBN: 1405115467 , 2005 .

[17]  Tobias Nipkow,et al.  Nitpick: A Counterexample Generator for Higher-Order Logic Based on a Relational Model Finder , 2010, ITP.

[18]  Christoph Benzmüller,et al.  Systematic Verification of the Modal Logic Cube in Isabelle/HOL , 2015, PxTP@CADE.

[19]  Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo,et al.  Interacting with Modal Logics in the Coq Proof Assistant , 2015, CSR.

[20]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  The Higher-Order Prover Leo-II , 2015, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[21]  Hans Jürgen Semantics-Based Translation Methods for Modal Logics , 1991 .

[22]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Extending Sledgehammer with SMT Solvers , 2011, CADE.

[23]  Christoph Benzmüller A Top-down Approach to Combining Logics , 2013, ICAART.

[24]  Erica Melis,et al.  Proof planning with multiple strategies , 2000, Artif. Intell..

[25]  Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo,et al.  Higher-Order Modal Logics: Automation and Applications , 2015, Reasoning Web.

[26]  Tobias Nipkow,et al.  A Proof Assistant for Higher-Order Logic , 2002 .

[27]  Adam Pease,et al.  Higher-order aspects and context in SUMO , 2012, J. Web Semant..

[28]  Renate A. Schmidt,et al.  Functional Translation and Second-Order Frame Properties of Modal Logics , 1997, J. Log. Comput..

[29]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Multimodal and intuitionistic logics in simple type theory , 2010, Log. J. IGPL.

[30]  Karin Ackermann,et al.  Labelled Deductive Systems , 2016 .

[31]  Christoph Benzmüller,et al.  Higher-Order Automated Theorem Provers , 2015 .

[32]  Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo,et al.  Automating Gödel's Ontological Proof of God's Existence with Higher-order Automated Theorem Provers , 2014, ECAI.

[33]  Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo,et al.  Gödel's God in Isabelle/HOL , 2013, Arch. Formal Proofs.

[34]  Jörg H. Siekmann,et al.  Computer supported mathematics with Omegamega , 2006, J. Appl. Log..

[35]  Geoff Sutcliffe,et al.  Automated Reasoning in Higher-Order Logic using the TPTP THF Infrastructure , 2010, J. Formaliz. Reason..

[36]  Chad E. Brown,et al.  Satallax: An Automatic Higher-Order Prover , 2012, IJCAR.

[37]  Geoff Sutcliffe The TPTP Problem Library and Associated Infrastructure , 2017, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[38]  Christoph Benzmüller,et al.  HOL Based First-Order Modal Logic Provers , 2013, LPAR.

[39]  A. Anderson,et al.  Some Emendations of Gödel's Ontological Proof , 1990 .

[40]  Jordan Howard Sobel,et al.  Logic and Theism: Arguments for and against Beliefs in God , 2003 .