Full classical S5 in natural deduction with weak normalization

Abstract Natural deduction systems for classical, intuitionistic and modal logics were deeply investigated by Prawitz [D. Prawitz, Natural Deduction: A Proof-theoretical Study, in: Stockholm Studies in Philosophy, vol. 3, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1965. Reprinted at: Dover Publications, Dover Books on Mathematics, 2006] from a proof-theoretical perspective. Prawitz proved weak normalization for classical logic only for a language without ∨ , ∃ and with a restricted application of reduction ad absurdum. Reduction steps related to ∨ , ∃ and classical negation bring about many problems solved only rather recently. For classical S5 modal logic, Prawitz defined a normalizable system, but for a language without ∨ , ∃ , ◊ and, for a propositional language without ◊ , Medeiros [M.da P.N. Medeiros, A new S4 classical modal logic in natural deduction, Journal of Symbolic Logic 71 (3) (2006) 799–809] presented a normalizable system for classical S4. We can mention many cut-free Gentzen systems for S4, S5 and K45/K45D, some normalizable natural deduction systems for intuitionistic modal logics and one more for full classical S4, but not for full classical S5. Here our focus is on the definition of a classical and normalizable natural deduction system for S5, taking not only □ and ◊ as primitive symbols, but also all connectives and quantifiers, including classical negation, disjunction and the existential quantifier. The normalization procedure is based on the strategy proposed by Massi [C.D.B. Massi, Provas de normalizacao para a logica classica, Ph.D. Thesis, Departamento de Filosofia, UNICAMP, Campinas, 1990] and Pereira and Massi [L.C. Pereira, C.D.B. Massi, Normalizacao para a logica classica, in: O que nos faz pensar, Cadernos de Filosofia da PUC-RJ, vol. 2, 1990, pp. 49–53] for first-order classical logic to cope with the combined use of classical negation, disjunction and the existential quantifier. Here we extend such results to deal with □ and ◊ too. The elimination rule for ◊ uses the notions of connection and of essentially modal formulas already proposed by Prawitz for the introduction of □ . Beyond weak normalization, we also prove the subformula property for full S5.

[1]  G. Mints,et al.  Cut-Free Calculi of the S5 Type , 1970 .

[2]  D. Prawitz Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study , 1965 .

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

[4]  Sara Negri,et al.  Proof Analysis in Modal Logic , 2005, J. Philos. Log..

[5]  Alex K. Simpson,et al.  The proof theory and semantics of intuitionistic modal logic , 1994 .

[6]  G. F. Shvarts,et al.  Gentzen Style Systems for K45 and K45D , 1989, Logic at Botik.

[7]  Richard Statman,et al.  Structural complexity of proofs , 1974 .

[8]  Andrea Masini,et al.  2-Sequent Calculus: Intuitionism and Natural Deduction , 1993, J. Log. Comput..

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

[10]  Torben Braüner,et al.  A Cut-Free Gentzen Formulation of the Modal Logic S5 , 2000, Log. J. IGPL.

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

[12]  Kazuo Matsumoto,et al.  Gentzen method in modal calculi. II , 1957 .

[13]  Maria da Paz N. Medeiros A new S4 classical modal logic in natural deduction , 2006, J. Symb. Log..

[14]  Heinrich Wansing,et al.  Sequent Calculi for Normal Modal Proposisional Logics , 1994, J. Log. Comput..

[15]  Luiz Carlos Pinheiro Dias Pereira,et al.  Normalização para a lógica clássica , 1990 .

[16]  Masahiko Sato A Cut-Free Gentzen-Type System for the Modal Logic S5 , 1980, J. Symb. Log..

[17]  Andrzej Indrzejczak Cut-free Sequent Calculus for S5 , 2007 .