E.-A. Cichon, M. Rusinowitch, and S. Selhab. Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs. Technical report, INRIA-Lorraine, Nancy, France, 1996. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Strong Normalization Proofs for Cut Elimination in Gentzen's.. - Bittar (Correct)
....theorem. ffl In [CRS94] Cichon, Rusinowitch and Selhab gave infinite rewriting systems representing classical and intuitionistic sequent calculi and several linear calculi and proved, with recursive path orderings, strong normalization theorems for the linear calculi which they considered. In [CRS96] they defined an infinite rewriting system for a symmetrical mix elimination system, without any confluent restriction; the termination of this rewriting system is obtained through a recursive path ordering. Another tradition for establishing a strong normalization theorem for mix elimination ....
....system RLKsp and hence its interpretation in the algebra of terms on F follows the rewriting system R LKsp . This mix elimination system ELKsp is based on a mix elimination system proposed in [Pab90] and is in the tradition of those studied in [Gen38] Gir87] GLT89] Tah92] Gal93] and [CRS96]. We show in a later section that the set of transformations given in this section is exhaustive, which means that each mix inference with non mix inference premises occurring in a proof matches at least one left hand side of a mix elimination rule. We point out also in this section that a mix ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
E.A. Cichon, M. Rusinowitch and S. Selhab, Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs, Submitted.
Cut-Elimination and a Permutation-Free Sequent Calculus for.. - Roy Dyckhoff Luis (1998) (7 citations) (Correct)
....the above definition of . So one must work instead not with the operators as given but with equivalence classes generated by the conditions that cut 4 (P) cut 2 (P) and cut 3 (P) cut 1 (P) This causes no additional difficulties. QED. 4. Related work Dershowitz [7] Okada (unpublished, see [3]) Cichon et al. [3] and Tahhan Bittar [26, 27] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [13] in proofs of cut elimination. As noted above, Herbelin s own proof of strong cut elimination for his calculus LJT uses the more complex structural ....
....of . So one must work instead not with the operators as given but with equivalence classes generated by the conditions that cut 4 (P) cut 2 (P) and cut 3 (P) cut 1 (P) This causes no additional difficulties. QED. 4. Related work Dershowitz [7] Okada (unpublished, see [3] Cichon et al. [3] and Tahhan Bittar [26, 27] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [13] in proofs of cut elimination. As noted above, Herbelin s own proof of strong cut elimination for his calculus LJT uses the more complex structural induction technique of ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Cichon, E. A., M. Rusinowitch and S. Selhab: "Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs", in preparation (preprint received in June 1996), INRIA-Lorraine, Nancy, France.
Cut-Elimination and a Permutation-Free Sequent Calculus for.. - Dyckhoff, Pinto (1998) (7 citations) (Correct)
....the above definition of . So one must work instead not with the operators as given but with equivalence classes generated by the conditions that cut 4 (P) cut 2 (P) and cut 3 (P) cut 1 (P) This causes no additional difficulties. QED. 4. Related work Dershowitz [7] Okada (unpublished, see [3]) Cichon et al. [3] and Tahhan Bittar [26, 27] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [13] in proofs of cut elimination. As noted above, Herbelin s own proof of strong cut elimination for his calculus LJT uses the more complex structural ....
....of . So one must work instead not with the operators as given but with equivalence classes generated by the conditions that cut 4 (P) cut 2 (P) and cut 3 (P) cut 1 (P) This causes no additional difficulties. QED. 4. Related work Dershowitz [7] Okada (unpublished, see [3] Cichon et al. [3] and Tahhan Bittar [26, 27] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [13] in proofs of cut elimination. As noted above, Herbelin s own proof of strong cut elimination for his calculus LJT uses the more complex structural induction technique of ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Cichon, E. A., M. Rusinowitch and S. Selhab: "Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs", in preparation (preprint received in June 1996), INRIA-Lorraine, Nancy, France.
A Permutation-Free Sequent Calculus for Intuitionistic Logic. - Dyckhoff, Pinto (1996) (8 citations) (Correct)
....is incomplete outside the hereditary Harrop setting: the rules for disjunction and existential quantification in the stoup are different. Further work is needed to clarify the relationship with the intercalation calculi of Sieg [35] and Cittadini [5] Dershowitz [8] Okada [unpublished, see [4]] and Cichon et al. [4] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [15] in proofs of cut elimination; 36] includes similar work. A permutation free sequent calculus for intuitionistic logic. Page 23 10. Conclusion and future work We have ....
....the hereditary Harrop setting: the rules for disjunction and existential quantification in the stoup are different. Further work is needed to clarify the relationship with the intercalation calculi of Sieg [35] and Cittadini [5] Dershowitz [8] Okada [unpublished, see [4] and Cichon et al. [4] have drawn attention to the applicability of term rewriting techniques (going back to Gentzen [15] in proofs of cut elimination; 36] includes similar work. A permutation free sequent calculus for intuitionistic logic. Page 23 10. Conclusion and future work We have given a version of part of ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Cichon, E. A., M. Rusinowitch and S. Selhab: "Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs", in preparation (preprint received in June 1996), INRIA-Lorraine, Nancy, France.
On Generalized Theorems for . . . - Aiguier, Boin, Longuet (Correct)
No context found.
E.-A. Cichon, M. Rusinowitch, and S. Selhab. Cut elimination and rewriting: termination proofs. Technical report, INRIA-Lorraine, Nancy, France, 1996.
Strong Normalisation of Cut-Elimination in Classical Logic - Urban, Bierman (2000) (3 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
E. A. Cichon, M. Rusinowitch, and S. Selhab. Cut-Elimination and Rewriting: Termination Proofs. Technical Report, 1996.
Strong Normalisation of Cut-Elimination in Classical Logic - Urban, Bierman (1999) (3 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
E. A. Cichon, M. Rusinowitch, and S. Selhab. Cut-Elimination and Rewriting: Termination Proofs. Technical Report, 1996.
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