- •Sense, Denotation and Semantics
- •Sense and denotation in logic
- •The algebraic tradition
- •The syntactic tradition
- •The two semantic traditions
- •Tarski
- •Heyting
- •Natural Deduction
- •The calculus
- •The rules
- •Interpretation of the rules
- •The Curry-Howard Isomorphism
- •Lambda Calculus
- •Types
- •Terms
- •Operational significance
- •Conversion
- •Description of the isomorphism
- •Relevance of the isomorphism
- •The Normalisation Theorem
- •The weak normalisation theorem
- •Proof of the weak normalisation theorem
- •Degree and substitution
- •Degree and conversion
- •Conversion of maximal degree
- •Proof of the theorem
- •The strong normalisation theorem
- •Sequent Calculus
- •The calculus
- •Sequents
- •Structural rules
- •The intuitionistic case
- •Logical rules
- •Some properties of the system without cut
- •The last rule
- •Subformula property
- •Asymmetrical interpretation
- •Sequent Calculus and Natural Deduction
- •Properties of the translation
- •Strong Normalisation Theorem
- •Reducibility
- •Properties of reducibility
- •Atomic types
- •Product type
- •Arrow type
- •Reducibility theorem
- •Pairing
- •Abstraction
- •The theorem
- •The calculus
- •Types
- •Terms
- •Intended meaning
- •Conversions
- •Normalisation theorem
- •Expressive power: examples
- •Booleans
- •Integers
- •Expressive power: results
- •Canonical forms
- •Representable functions
- •Coherence Spaces
- •General ideas
- •Coherence Spaces
- •The web of a coherence space
- •Interpretation
- •Stable functions
- •Parallel Or
- •Direct product of two coherence spaces
- •The Function-Space
- •The trace of a stable function
- •Representation of the function space
- •The Berry order
- •Partial functions
- •Denotational Semantics of T
- •Simple typed calculus
- •Types
- •Terms
- •Properties of the interpretation
- •Booleans
- •Integers
- •Sums in Natural Deduction
- •Defects of the system
- •Standard conversions
- •The need for extra conversions
- •Subformula Property
- •Extension to the full fragment
- •Commuting conversions
- •Properties of conversion
- •The associated functional calculus
- •Empty type
- •Sum type
- •Additional conversions
- •System F
- •The calculus
- •Comments
- •Representation of simple types
- •Booleans
- •Product of types
- •Empty type
- •Sum type
- •Existential type
- •Representation of a free structure
- •Free structure
- •Representation of the constructors
- •Induction
- •Representation of inductive types
- •Integers
- •Lists
- •Binary trees
- •Trees of branching type U
- •The Curry-Howard Isomorphism
- •Coherence Semantics of the Sum
- •Direct sum
- •Lifted sum
- •dI-domains
- •Linearity
- •Characterisation in terms of preservation
- •Linear implication
- •Linearisation
- •Linearised sum
- •Tensor product and units
- •Cut Elimination (Hauptsatz)
- •The key cases
- •The principal lemma
- •The Hauptsatz
- •Resolution
- •Strong Normalisation for F
- •Idea of the proof
- •Reducibility candidates
- •Remarks
- •Reducibility with parameters
- •Substitution
- •Universal abstraction
- •Universal application
- •Reducibility theorem
- •Representation Theorem
- •Representable functions
- •Numerals
- •Total recursive functions
- •Provably total functions
- •Proofs into programs
- •Formulation of HA2
- •Translation of HA2 into F
- •Representation of provably total functions
- •Semantics of System F
- •What is Linear Logic?
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHAPTER 10. SUMS IN NATURAL DEDUCTION |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[A] |
[B] |
|
|||
|
|
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
converts to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A |
||||
|
|
|
|
1 |
I |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
_ |
_ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
A |
B |
|
|
|
C |
C |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_E |
|
C |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[A] |
[B] |
|
|||
|
|
B |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
converts to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B |
||||
|
|
|
|
2 |
I |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
_ |
_ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
A |
B |
|
|
|
C |
C |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_E |
|
C |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[A] |
converts to |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
A[a= ] |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A[a= ] |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9I |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: A |
C |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C |
|
|
|
C |
|
Note that, since there is no introduction rule for ?, there is no standard conversion for this symbol.
Let us just think for a moment about the structure of redexes: on the one hand there is an introduction, on the other an elimination, and the elimination follows the introduction. But there are some eliminations (), _, 9) with more premises and we only consider as redexes the case where the introduction ends in the principal premise of the elimination, namely the one which carries the
eliminated symbol. For example |
|
|
||
|
[A] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
B |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
)I |
|
|
|
A ) B |
(A ) B) ) C |
||
|
|
C |
|
)E |
is not considered as a redex. This is fortunate, as we would have trouble converting it!
10.3The need for extra conversions
To understand how we are naturally led to introducing extra conversions, let us examine the proof of the Subformula Property in the case of the (^; ); 8) fragment in such a way as to see the obstacles to generalising it.
10.3. THE NEED FOR EXTRA CONVERSIONS |
75 |
10.3.1Subformula Property
Theorem Let be a normal deduction in the (^ ) 8) fragment. Then
i)every formula in is a subformula of a conclusion or a hypothesis of ;
ii)if ends in an elimination, it has a principal branch, i.e. a sequence of formulae A0; A1; : : : ; An such that:
A0 is an (undischarged) hypothesis;
An is the conclusion;
Ai is the principal premise of an elimination of which the conclusion is Ai+1 (for i = 0; : : : ; n 1).
In particular An is a subformula of A0.
Proof We have three cases to consider:
1.If consists of a hypothesis, there is nothing to do.
2.If ends in an introduction, for example
AB
^I
A ^ B
then it su ces to apply the induction hypothesis above A and B.
3. If ends in an elimination, for example
A ) B A
)E
B
it is not possible that the proof above the principal premise ends in an introduction, so it ends in an elimination and has a principal branch, which can be extended to a principal branch of .
