Automating Theories in Intuitionistic Logic

Abstract

Abstract. Deduction modulo consists in applying the inference rules of a deductive system modulo a rewrite system over terms and formulae. This is equivalent to proving within a so-called compatible theory. Conversely, given a first-order theory, one may want to internalize it into a rewrite system that can be used in deduction modulo, in order to get an analytic deductive system for that theory. In a recent paper, we have shown how this can be done in classical logic. In intuitionistic logic, however, we show here not only that this may be impossible, but also that the set of theories that can be transformed into a rewrite system with an analytic sequent calculus modulo is not co-recursively enumerable. We nonetheless propose a procedure to transform a large class of theories into compatible rewrite systems. We then extend this class by working in conservative extensions, in particular using Skolemization.

Deduction modulo theory

“…The second reason is that any consistent set of axioms can be transformed into a Polarized reduction system that is classically equivalent [29,14] and some sets of axioms can be transformed into a Polarized reduction system that is constructively equivalent [11].…”

“…Then, as already said, systematic ways of transforming sets of axioms into sets of reduction rules have been investigated [29,14,11].…”

Towards Combining Model Checking and Proof Checking

“…Model checking [12,6,2] and automated theorem proving [18,21,8] are two pillars of formal methods. They differ by the fact that model checking often uses decidable logics, such as propositional modal logics, while automated theorem proving mostly uses undecidable ones, such as first-order logic.…”