On paradox without self-reference

We develop rules for coalgebras in type theory, and give meaning explanations for them. We show that elements of coalgebras are determined by their elimination rules, whereas the introduction rules can be considered as derived. This is in contrast with algebraic data types, for which the opposite is true: elements are determined by their introduction rules, and the elimination rules can be considered as derived. In this sense, the function type from the logical framework is more like a coalgebraic data type, the elements of which are determined by the elimination rule. We illustrate why the simplest form of guarded recursion is nothing but the introduction rule originating from the formulation of coalgebras in category theory. We discuss restrictions needed in order to preserve decidability of equality.

This paper formulates a bilateral account of harmony that is an alternative to one proposed by Francez. It builds on an account of harmony for unilateral logic proposed by K\"urbis and the observation that reading the rules for the connectives of bilateral logic bottom up gives the grounds and consequences of formulas with the opposite speech act. I formulate a process I call 'inversion' which allows the determination of assertive elimination rules from assertive introduction rules, and rejective elimination rules from rejective introduction rules, and conversely. It corresponds to Francez's notion of vertical harmony. I also formulate a process I call 'conversion', which allows the determination of rejective introduction rules from assertive elimination rules and conversely, and the determination of assertive introduction rules from rejective elimination rules and conversely. It corresponds to Francez's notion of horizontal harmony. The account has a number of features that distinguishes it from Francez's.

The idea of an ‘inversion principle’, and the name itself, originated in the work of Paul Lorenzen in the 1950s, as a method to generate new admissible rules within a certain syntactic context. Some fifteen years later, the idea was taken up by Dag Prawitz to devise a strategy of normalization for natural deduction calculi (this being an analogue of Gentzen's cut-elimination theorem for sequent calculi). Later, Prawitz used the inversion principle again, attributing it with a semantic role. Still working in natural deduction calculi, he formulated a general type of schematic introduction rules to be matched – thanks to the idea supporting the inversion principle – by a corresponding general schematic Elimination rule. This was an attempt to provide a solution to the problem suggested by the often quoted note of Gentzen. According to Gentzen ‘it should be possible to display the elimination rules as unique functions of the corresponding introduction rules on the basis of certain requirements’. Many people have since worked on this topic, which can be appropriately seen as the birthplace of what are now referred to as “general elimination rules”, recently studied thoroughly by Sara Negri and Jan von Plato. In this study, we retrace the main threads of this chapter of proof-theoretical investigation, using Lorenzen's original framework as a general guide.

We explicate the different ways that a first-order sentence can be true (resp., false) in a model M, as formal objects, called (M-relative) truth-makers (resp., falsity-makers). M-relative truth-makers and falsity-makers are co-inductively definable, by appeal to the “atomic facts” in M, and to certain rules of verification and of falsification, collectively called rules of evaluation. Each logical operator has a rule of verification, much like an introduction rule; and a rule of falsification, much like an elimination rule. Applications of the rules (∀) and (∃) involve infinite furcation when the domain of M is infinite. But even in the infinite case, truth-makers and falsity-makers are tree-like objects whose branches are at most finitely long. A sentence φ is true (resp., false) in a model M (in the sense of Tarski) if and only if there existsπ such that π is an M-relative truth-maker (resp., falsity-maker) for φ. With “ways of being true” explicated as these logical truthmakers, one can re-conceive logical consequence between given premises and a conclusion. It obtains just in case there is a suitable method for transforming M-relative truthmakers for the premises into an M-relative truthmaker for the conclusion, whatever the model M may be.

The behavior of languages such as C++, Java, Smalltalk and Eiffel and the modeling features such classes, inheritance, polymorphism, message passing are discussed. The important theoretical approaches such as subtyping, F-bounds, matching and the object calculus are also discussed. A mathematical model was developed, that show the possibility of motivating the existence of something as relatively sophisticated as an object with a state and method. The two kind of type rules include: introduction rules that describes the formation of functions and records and elimination rules, describing the decomposition of constructions.

In the Trinity Term of 1977 I had the privilege of hearing Michael Dummett lecture in the Old Library at All Souls on the justification and criticism of logical laws, and subsequently I also assisted Mark Helme in the production of some unauthorised, not altogether successful, notes on these lectures. I can vividly recall my surprise when Prof. Dummett stated, in connection with the idea with which he had up till then been mainly concerned, namely the idea that meaning is primarily determined in terms of the Gentzen introduction rules, that my old tutor, the Swedish logician Per Martin-Lof, in correspondence, held that “the meanings of the logical constants CAN IN NO WAY be given by the introduction rules, rather they are given by the elimination rules”.1 This was, as far as I knew from tutorials and conversations with Martin-Lof, not a position he would defend at the time and certainly not today. In fact, he has steadfastly held by the introduction-rule orthodoxy in all relevant publications from 1979 onwards.2 Taken jointly those publications constitute, as far as I know, the only sustained effort towards a realisation of a constructivist theory of meaning for a sizeable interpreted language serving the needs of pure mathematics on a scale comparable to that of Frege’s Grundgesetze. From this circumstance alone it seems clear that much of Dummettian interest can be found in the works of Martin-Lof.

A general formulation of inductive and recursive definitions in Martin-Löf's type theory is presented. It extends Backhouse's ‘Do-It-Yourself Type Theory’ to include inductive definitions of families of sets and definitions of functions by recursion on the way elements of such sets are generated. The formulation is in natural deduction and is intended to be a natural generalisation to type theory of Martin-Löf's theory of iterated inductive definitions in predicate logic.Formal criteria are given for correct formation and introduction rules of a new set former capturing definition by strictly positive, iterated, generalised induction. Moreover, there is an inversion principle for deriving elimination and equality rules from the formation and introduction rules. Finally, there is an alternative schematic presentation of definition by recursion.The resulting theory is a flexible and powerful language for programming and constructive mathematics. We hint at the wealth of possible applications by showing several basic examples: predicate logic, generalised induction, and a formalisation of the untyped lambda calculus.

Proof Certificates for Equality Reasoning

We present algorithms for maximum likelihood soft decoding of the second order Reed-Muller codes RM(2,m) and the extended (24,12,8) Golay code. The decoding procedures are based on a concise representation of appropriately selected cosets of a subcode of the code considered. Such representation enables application of certain elimination rules. A structure, called constrained design, is established to support the elimination procedures. Remarkably efficient algorithms are obtainable by this approach. The method of elimination is applicable also in combination with existing coset decoding schemes.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

Normal forms and syntactic completeness proofs for functional independencies

The topics of structural proof theory and logic programming have influenced each other for more than three decades. Proof theory has contributed the notion of sequent calculus, linear logic, and higher-order quantification. Logic programming has introduced new normal forms of proofs and forced the examination of logic-based approaches to the treatment of bindings. As a result, proof theory has responded by developing an approach to proof search based on focused proof systems in which introduction rules are organized into two alternating phases of rule application. Since the logic programming community can generate many examples and many design goals (e.g., modularity of specifications and higher-order programming), the close connections with proof theory have helped to keep proof theory relevant to the general topic of computational logic.

Prawitz proved a theorem, formalising ‘harmony’ in Natural Deduction systems, which showed that, corresponding to any deduction there is one to the same effect but in which no formula occurrence is both the consequence of an application of an introduction rule and major premise of an application of the related elimination rule. As Gentzen ordered the rules, certain rules in Classical Logic had to be excepted, but if we see the appropriate rules instead as rules for Contradiction, then we can extend the theorem to the classical case. Properly arranged there is a thoroughgoing ‘harmony’, in the classical rules. Indeed, as we shall see, they are, all together, far more ‘harmonious’ in the general sense than has been commonly observed. As this paper will show, the appearance of disharmony has only arisen because of the illogical way in which natural deduction rules for Classical Logic have been presented.

Quality Control in Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Cervical Cancer

The generation of too much information prohibits efficient resolution proof search in classical logics. Subsumption is used to discard redundant information and strategies have been developed to guide the proof search avoiding irrelevant information. The extension of the resolution method to temporal logics, further magnifies this problem. Here we develop an algorithm for the removal of irrelevant information during resolution proofs for a particular resolution proof system for propositional linear-time temporal logic. The resolution system operates on formulae in a normal form. Following a phase of classical style resolution, temporal resolution is carried out by detecting sets of formulae that together represent an □-formula to be resolved with a ◊-formula. It is before the application of the temporal resolution rule that the new algorithm is applied to efficiently remove irrelevant information. The completeness of the new algorithm is discussed and its complexity considered. Its practical efficiency is demonstrated by giving timings for a set of examples.

Background: Delayed diagnosis and improper treated cases of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in the presence of excessive anteversion of femoral head may lead to undesirable consequences, including more extensive interventions with severe complications and functional disability. This study aimed to compare the clinical, radiological, and complication outcomes of simultaneously versus two-stage surgical procedures (open reduction and proximal femoral derotation osteotomy) in the treatment of DDH with excessive femoral anteversion among a sample of Iraqi children aged less than three years old. &#x0D; Methods: A total of 26 DDH cases were treated in two groups (GI, GII) at Al-Wasity Teaching Hospital (Baghdad, Iraq) from January 2014 to March 2015. GI (15 hips) in 13 patients subjected to simultaneous open reduction (with/without salter osteotomy) and proximal femoral derotation osteotomy. GII (18 hips) in 13 patients operated in two stages procedure; open reduction (with/without salter osteotomy) followed by proximal femoral derotation osteotomy six weeks later. &#x0D; Results: At the time of operation, the average age was 21.79±3.51months (range: 18-30). The mean follow-up period was 10.36 ±1.45 months (range, 8 -12). Statistically, the postoperative clinical, radiological, and complication findings were not significantly different between the two groups. However, in post-operative clinical assessment (McKay's criteria), the satisfying results (excellent and good) were 93% in GI and 88% in GII, respectively. Moreover, in radiological assessment (Severins classification), the satisfying results (excellent and good) were 94% in GI and 83% in GII, respectively. Two cases of re-dislocation and avascular necrosis (AVN) were reported in GII.&#x0D; Conclusion: When the clinical and radiological findings of one and two-stage open reduction and proximal femoral derotation osteotomy procedures are similar, the one-stage is more likely to overcome the two-stage in terms of minimizing the cost, length of stay and the risk of AVN of the femoral head.