Preliminaries

Chapter
Part of the Trends in Logic book series (TREN, volume 30)

Abstract

This Chapter has an introductory character. The main objective of Section 1.1. has been to recall the basic information on the language of classical propositional logicCPL and on the quantificational logic in classical (CQL) and free version (FQL). The approach chosen here is rather informal. In case of CPL we introduce only the language and syntactical conventions applied throughout, while in case of QL, a brief outline of classical and free logic is additionaly highlighted by some comments concerning philosophical motivations. The section contains also some technical information, e.g. on relations and trees, essential in the foregoing. It should be emphasized that this section is just to establish notation and to keep the text self-contained, so much of it may be skipped in the first reading and consulted when necessary for understanding later chapters.

Keywords

Modal Logic Deductive System Natural Deduction Horn Clause Sequent Calculus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Reference

  1. [285]
    Wójcicki, R. Theory of logical calculi. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  2. [196]
    De Nivelle, H., R.A. Schmidt, and U. Hustadt. 2000. Resolution-based methods for modal logics. Logic Journal of the IGPL 8(3): 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [35]
    Blackburn, P., M. DeRijke, and Y. Venema. 2001. Modal logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. [215]
    Pogorzelski, W.A. 1973. Klasyczny rachunek zdań. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
  5. [220]
    Prawitz, D. 1965. Natural deduction. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
  6. [261]
    Smullyan, R. 1968. First-order logic. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. [105]
    Garson, J.W. 2006. Modal logic for philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. [2]
    D’Agostino, M. 1999. Tableau methods for classical propositional logic. In Handbook of tableau methods, eds. M. D’Agostino et al., 45–123. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. [113]
    Goranko, V. 1994. Refutation systems in modal logic. Studia Logica 53(2): 229–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [257]
    Simpson, A. 1994. The Proof Theory and Semantics of Intuitionistic Modal Logic, PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  11. [70]
    Church, A. 1956. Introduction to Mathematical Logic, vol I. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. [96]
    Fitting, M., and R.L. Mendelsohn. 1998. First-order modal logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. [278]
    Wallen, L.A. 1990. Automated proof search in non-classical logics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. [258]
    Skura, T. 1992. Refutation rules for three modal logics. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 21(1): 31–32.Google Scholar
  15. [286]
    Vickers, S. 1988. Topology via logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. [25]
    Bencivenga, E. 1986. Free logics. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic, eds. D. Gabbay, and F. Guenthner, vol III, 373–426. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  17. [242]
    Schmidt, R.A. 2006. Developing modal tableaux and resolution methods via first-order resolution. In Advances in modal logic 6, ed. M. deRijke, 107–135. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. LogicUniversity of LódzLódzPoland

Personalised recommendations