Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Upper and Lower Bounds for the Height of Proofs in Sequent Calculus for Intuitionistic Logic

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Upper and lower bounds for the height of proofs in sequent calculus for intuitionistic logic are proved for the case when cut formulas may only contain essentially positive occurrences of the existential quantifier. The considered cases include both proofs with and proofs without function symbols.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A. G. Dragalin, Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory, AMS, (1988).

  2. S. C. Kleene, Permutability of Inferences in Gentzen’s Caculi LK and LJ, Memoirs AMS, 10 (1952).

  3. S. C. Kleene, Mathematical Logic, New York (1967).

  4. B. Yu. Konev, “Refinement of bounds of the heights of terms in the most general unifer,” Zap. Nauchn. Sem. POMI, 241, 117–134 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  5. B. Yu. Konev, “Upper bound on the height of terms in proofs with bound-depth-restricted cuts,” Zap. Nauchn. Sem. POMI, 277, 80–103 (2001).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. G. E. Mints and V. P. Orevkov, “On embedding operations,”Zap. Nauchn. Sem. LOMI, 4, 160–167 (1967).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. V. P. Orevkov, “On Glivenko sequent classes,” Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov., 98, 131–154 (1968).

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. V. P. Orevkov, “Lower bounds for lengthening of proofs after cut-elimination,” Zap. Nauchn. Sem. LOMI, 88, 137–162 (1979).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. V. P. Orevkov, Complexity of Proofs and Their Transformations in Axiomatic Theories, AMS (1993).

  10. R. Harrop, “Concerning formulas of types A → B ∨ C,A → ∃xB(x),” J. Symbolic Logic, 25, No. 1, 27–32 (1960).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. R. Statman, The Predicate Calculus is Not a Kalmar Elementary Speed-up of the Equation Calculus, Preprint, Cambbridge (1975).

  12. R. Statman, “Bounds for proof-search and speed-up in the predicate calculus,” Ann. Math. Logic, 15, No. 3, 225–287 (1978).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St.Petersburg Department of the Steklov Mathematical Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia

    V. P. Orevkov

Authors
  1. V. P. Orevkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. P. Orevkov.

Additional information

Translated from Zapiski Nauchnykh Seminarov POMI, Vol. 497, 2020, pp. 124–169.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Orevkov, V.P. Upper and Lower Bounds for the Height of Proofs in Sequent Calculus for Intuitionistic Logic. J Math Sci 275, 195–224 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10958-023-06671-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10958-023-06671-z

Search

Navigation