SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.21143

Sequent-style tableaux for intuitionistic propositional logic

Abstract

Sequent-style tableaux are a refutation calculus in which each node of the refutation tree carries a finite block of formulae and the structural rules are absorbed into the data structure and the closure criterion. In their original, classical form they rest on an involutive De Morgan negation and on closure upon a complementary pair. We show that both may be dispensed with. Replacing unsigned formulae by signed ones, we obtain a block calculus $\mathbf{B}_{ti}$ for intuitionistic propositional logic in which the whole of intuitionism is carried by one rule, the rule decomposing $\mathsf{F}(A \to B)$, which deletes the $\mathsf{F}$-part of the context on passing to the child block. The rules so obtained are, up to the presentation, those of Fitting's signed tableaux; what is new is the block format, in which the structural rules are absorbed rather than admissible, and what follows from it. We identify the semantic reason for this rule and for the one other anomalous one: of the signed compounds of the language, exactly those governed by the implication fail to be locally decomposable, and the two failures are repaired, respectively, by retaining the principal formula and by purging the context. We prove that $\mathbf{B}_{ti}$ is the multiple-succedent sequent calculus $\mathbf{G}_{ti}$ read upside down, that $\mathbf{G}_{ti}$ admits the structural rules, and that $\mathbf{B}_{ti}$ is sound and complete for Kripke semantics, with the finite model property and a block-theoretic proof of the disjunction property.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Simone Cuconato. 2026-08-21. Sequent-style tableaux for intuitionistic propositional logic. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21143

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO