Extended Natural Deduction

In this Chapter there is a continual emphasis on the application of ND as a tool of proof search and possibly of automation. In particular, we take up the question of how to make ND a universal system. In order to find satisfactory solutions we compare ND with other types of DS’s. Although ND systems are rather rarely considered in the context of automated deduction they presumably accord with each other and ND systems may be turned into useful automatic proof search procedures. Moreover, even if there are some problems with the construction of efficient ND-based provers, it seems that for the widely understood computer-aided forms of teaching logic, ND should be acknowledged. A good evidence for this claim is provided by the increasing number of proof assistants, tutors, checkers and other interactive programs of this sort based on some forms of ND. Section 4.1. is devoted to the general discussion of these questions, whereas the rest of the Chapter takes up successively the presentation of some concrete, universal and analytic versions of ND for classical and free logic.

[1]  Maarten de Rijke,et al.  Resolution in Modal, Description and Hybrid Logic , 2001, J. Log. Comput..

[2]  Gentzen's Hauptsatz for the systems NI and NK , 1965 .

[3]  Francis Jeffry Pelletier Automated Natural Deduction in Thinker , 1998, Stud Logica.

[4]  Helmut Schwichtenberg,et al.  Basic proof theory , 1996, Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science.

[5]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  Automated theorem proving: a logical basis , 1978, Fundamental studies in computer science.

[6]  Frederic D. Portoraro Strategic Construction of Fitch-style Proofs , 1998, Stud Logica.

[7]  Branislav R. Boricic On sequence-conclusion natural deduction systems , 1985, J. Philos. Log..

[8]  Jan von Plato,et al.  Gentzen's Proof of Normalization for Natural Deduction , 2008, Bull. Symb. Log..

[9]  R. Smullyan First-Order Logic , 1968 .

[10]  M. Fitting Proof Methods for Modal and Intuitionistic Logics , 1983 .

[11]  Raymond M. Smullyan,et al.  Analytic natural deduction , 1965, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[12]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[13]  R. Montague,et al.  Logic : Techniques of Formal Reasoning , 1964 .

[14]  Andrzej Indrzejczak,et al.  RESOLUTION BASED NATURAL DEDUCTION , 2002 .

[15]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Methods of Logic , 1951 .

[16]  Rajeev Goré,et al.  Tableau Methods for Modal and Temporal Logics , 1999 .

[17]  Gunnar Stålmarck,et al.  Normalization theorems for full first order classical natural deduction , 1991, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[18]  Melvin Fitting,et al.  Destructive Modal Resolution , 1990, J. Log. Comput..

[19]  Carlo Cellucci Existential instantiation and normalization in sequent natural deduction , 1992 .

[20]  Sara Negri,et al.  Structural proof theory , 2001 .

[21]  Wilfried Sieg,et al.  Normal Natural Deduction Proofs (in classical logic) , 1998, Stud Logica.

[22]  John L. Pollock,et al.  Interest driven suppositional reasoning , 1990, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[23]  Raymond M. Smullyan Trees and Nest Structures , 1966, J. Symb. Log..

[24]  Marcello D'Agostino,et al.  Tableau Methods for Classical Propositional Logic , 1999 .

[25]  Melvin Fitting,et al.  First-Order Logic and Automated Theorem Proving , 1990, Graduate Texts in Computer Science.

[26]  D. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of tableau methods , 1999 .

[27]  Jonathan P. Seldin,et al.  Normalization and excluded middle. I , 1989, Stud Logica.

[28]  Richard C. T. Lee,et al.  Symbolic logic and mechanical theorem proving , 1973, Computer science classics.

[29]  Alexander Bolotov,et al.  Automated First Order Natural Deduction , 2005, IICAI.