Basic proof theory
Forum: a multiple-conclusion specification logic
ALP Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Algebraic and logic programming
Using Linear Logic to Reason about Sequent Systems
TABLEAUX '02 Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods
From Axioms to Analytic Rules in Nonclassical Logics
LICS '08 Proceedings of the 2008 23rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
Algorithmic specifications in linear logic with subexponentials
PPDP '09 Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Principles and practice of declarative programming
Focusing and polarization in linear, intuitionistic, and classical logics
Theoretical Computer Science
LJQ: a strongly focused calculus for intuitionistic logic
CiE'06 Proceedings of the Second conference on Computability in Europe: logical Approaches to Computational Barriers
On the specification of sequent systems
LPAR'05 Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning
A formal framework for specifying sequent calculus proof systems
Theoretical Computer Science
A general proof system for modalities in concurrent constraint programming
CONCUR'13 Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Concurrency Theory
Finite-valued Semantics for Canonical Labelled Calculi
Journal of Automated Reasoning
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In the past years, linear logic has been successfully used as a general logical framework for encoding proof systems. Due to linear logic@?s finer control on structural rules, it is possible to match the structural restrictions specified in the encoded logic with the use of linear logic connectives. However, some systems that impose more complicated structural restrictions on its sequents cannot be easily captured in linear logic, since it only distinguishes two types of formulas: classical and linear. This work shows that one can encode a wider range of proof systems by using focused linear logic with subexponentials. We demonstrate this by encoding the system G1m for minimal, the multi-conclusion system, mLJ, and the focused system LJQ*, for intuitionistic logic. Finally, we identify general conditions for determining whether a linear logic formula corresponds to an object-logic rule and whether this rule is invertible.