ALBERT GRIGOREVICH DRAGALIN. Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory, volume 67 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 1987. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Relevant and Substructural Logics - Restall (2001) (3 citations) (Correct)
....f of truth values goes some way towards telling us the meanings of those connectives. More than that, it gives us an account of the behaviour of logical 68 This debate is between truth conditional [260] versus inferentialist [50] accounts of meaning in philosophy of language, proof theorists [118, 73] and model theorists [25, 136] in mathematical logic, and operational and denotational semantics in computer science [198] Greg Restall, Greg.Restall mq.edu.au June 23, 2001 http: www.phil.mq.edu.au staff grestall 52 consequence, as the set of truth values has a natural order. We can order ....
ALBERT GRIGOREVICH DRAGALIN. Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory, volume 67 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 1987.
Metalogical Frameworks - Basin, Constable (1992) (27 citations) (Correct)
....So one cannot use a multiset ordering. Various methods have been proposed to circumvent this difficulty. One can compute the number of times the formula A ) B needs to be used for example. Roy Dyckhoff has discovered a method [19] and in his paper he surveys other ones and recommends the source [18]. His idea is to replace the implication elimination rule with the five others given in Figure 6; he calls the resulting system LJT. In LJT all rules generate simpler subgoal sequents so that termination of the proof search can be guaranteed via the multiset ordering. He proves: A formula of IPC ....
Albert G. Dragalin. Mathematical Intuitionism -- introduction to proof theory Translations of mathematical monographs vol. 67. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1988.
Inducing Search Methods from Proofs - Lopes (1997) (Correct)
....relations amongst sequents, an n premiss rule being an n 1 ary relation: if s 1 ; s n ; s n 1 is an element of some n premiss rule, s 1 ; s n are the premisses and s n 1 is conclusion. The figure 1 presents Dragalin s formalization for Intuitionistic Propositional Calculus([7]) All proofs in this report assume this formalization or some restriction of it, and we will be referring to Intuitionistic Propositional Calculus as IPC. This framework is adequate for presentations based on natural deduction and sequent calculus. Specifically, in this report we will be working ....
....notions are those of sequent and inference rule. A valid sequent in a logic is any element of its consequence relation. Definition 1 Sequent = Def an ordered pair whose components are sets of formulae. In this report we will be working with examples from IPC, using Dragalin s formalization ([7]) The syntax for propositions is the standard and is defined in that book. Notation 1 Lowercase letters from the English alphabet are used as names for atomic propositions. Notation 2 Sequents are displayed by the usual notation Gamma Delta. The following calligraphic letters (possibly ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Albert Grigorevich Dragalin. Mathematical Intuitionism --- Introduction to Proof Theory, volume 67 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1988.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC