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
.