The Display Problem

  • Nuel Belnap
Chapter
Part of the Applied Logic Series book series (APLS, volume 2)

Abstract

A Gentzen calculus has the ‘display property’ if every antecedent [consequent] constituent can be displayed as the antecedent [consequent] standing alone. It is explained why this property is interesting. The ‘display problem’ is the problem of designing a calculus with the display property. A perspective is suggested from which the solution of Wansing [19] can easily be seen to be incomparable with that of [4]. The perspective suggests some other solutions, which are briefly surveyed. Additional questions are raised.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    G. Allwein, C. Hartonas. Duality for bounded lattices. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University Logic Group Preprint Series, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. R. Anderson, N. D. Belnap. Entailment: the logic of relevance and necessity. Vol. I, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1975.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. R. Anderson, N. D. Belnap, J. M. Dunn. Entailment: the logic of relevance and necessity. Vol. II, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    N. Belnap. Display logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic,11 375–417, 1982. Republished with minor changes as §62 of [3].Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    N. Belnap. Linear logic displayed. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 31, 14–25, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. B. Curry. A theory of formal deducibility. Notre Dame mathematical lectures, vol. no. 6, Notre Dame University Press, Notre Dame, 1950.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. M. Dunn. Gaggle theory: an abstraction of Galois connections and residuation with applications to negation and various logical operations. In: J. van Eijck (ed.), Logics in Al: Proceedings European Workshop JELJA 1990, pp. 31–51, Lecture Notes in Computer Sci. 478, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. M. Dunn. Partial-gaggles applied to sub-structural logics. In: P. Schroeder-Heister, K. Dosen (eds.), Substructural logics, pp. 63–108, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. M. Dunn. A representation of relation algebras using Routley-Meyer frames. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University Logic Group Preprint Series, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. M. Dunn. Perp and Star: two treatments of negation. In: J. Tomberlin (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives, vol. 7, Language and Logic, pp. 331–157, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [11] G. Gentzen. Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen. Mathenuuische Zeitschrift, 39, 176-210, 405-431,1934. English translation (Investigations into logical deduction)
    by M. E. Szabo in: The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen, M. E. Szabo (ed.), pp. 69–131, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1969.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R. Goré. Displayed intuitionistic modal logics. Technical report in preparation, Australian National University, April, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    R. Goré. Displaying sub-intuitionistic logics. Technical report in preparation, Australian National University, April 1994b.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    R. Goré. Intuitionistic logic redisplayed. Technical report, TR-ARP-1–1995, Australian National University, January 1995.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    C. Hartonas. Lattices with operators: a unified semantics for substructural logics. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University Logic Group Preprint Series, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    C. Hartonas, J. M. Dunn. Duality theorems for partial orders, semilattices, and Galois connections and lattices. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University Logic Group Preprint Series, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    M. Kracht. Power and weakness of the modal display calculus. Technical report, Free University of Berlin, Mathematics Institute II, August, 1993.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    R. K. Meyer. A general Gentzen system for implicational calculi. Relevance Logic Newsletter, 1, 198–201, 1976.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    H. Wansing. Sequent calculi for normal modal propositional logics. Technical report, n. LP-92–12, University of Amsterdam, 1992, Journal of Logic and Computation, 4, 124–142, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nuel Belnap
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations