Talk:Sequent calculus
From LLWiki
Revision as of 17:07, 21 January 2009 by Emmanuel Beffara (Talk | contribs)
Quantifiers
The presentation does not seem to be completely uniform concerning quantifiers: are first-order quantifiers taken into account? It would be nice.
A few related points:
- Why a distinction between atomic formulas and propositional variables?
- Some mixing between and . I tried to propose a convention on that point, but it does not match here with the use of α for atoms.
- Define immediate subformula of as A?
-- Olivier Laurent 18:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- I improved the uniformity for quantifiers: the full system with first and second order quantification is described, only predicate variables with first-order arguments are not described.
- The distinction between atomic formulas and propositional variables is because there are systems with atomic formulas that are not propositional variables but fixed predicates like equalities.
- I found α to be a used notation for atomic formulas in other texts, so I used ξ,ψ,ζ instead for arbitrary variables.
- Using substitution in the definition of subformulas is questionable, but if the only immediate subformula of is A, then the subformula property does not hold.
- Edit: Well... my bad. The subformula property does hold if the only immediate subformula of is A, substitution is necessary only for . I changed it.
Two-sided sequent calculus
I think the terminology "two-sided sequent calculus" should be used for the system where all the connectives are involved and all the rules are duplicated (with respect to the one-sided version) and negation is a connective.
In this way, we obtain the one-sided version from the two-sided one by:
- quotient the formulas by de Morgan laws and get negation only on atoms, negation is defined for compound formulas (not a connective)
- fold all the rules by
- remove useless rules (negation rules become identities, almost all the rules appear twice)
A possible name for the two-sided system presented here could be "two-sided positive sequent calculus".
-- Olivier Laurent 21:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)