Completeness of the Gentzen Sequent Calculus
$begingroup$
Let $A_1, dots, A_n ,B_1, dots, B_m in mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ with $models lnot A_1 lor ldots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor ldots lor B_m$ ($mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ is the set of formulas built up from propositional variables and the connectives $lnot$ and $lor$). Show that this implies that the sequent $A_1, ldots, A_n vdash_G B_1, ldots, B_m$ is derivable in the Gentzen sequent calculus.
Use induction over the overall number of operators ($lor$ and $lnot$) in $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$.
Note: As a special case of the statement above we get: if $models B_1$ then $vdash_G B_1$ is derivable (for $B_1 in mathcal{F}_{lnot,lor}$).
I understand Gentzen sequence calculus. But I am unable to prove this using induction.
logic propositional-calculus proof-theory sequent-calculus
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $A_1, dots, A_n ,B_1, dots, B_m in mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ with $models lnot A_1 lor ldots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor ldots lor B_m$ ($mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ is the set of formulas built up from propositional variables and the connectives $lnot$ and $lor$). Show that this implies that the sequent $A_1, ldots, A_n vdash_G B_1, ldots, B_m$ is derivable in the Gentzen sequent calculus.
Use induction over the overall number of operators ($lor$ and $lnot$) in $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$.
Note: As a special case of the statement above we get: if $models B_1$ then $vdash_G B_1$ is derivable (for $B_1 in mathcal{F}_{lnot,lor}$).
I understand Gentzen sequence calculus. But I am unable to prove this using induction.
logic propositional-calculus proof-theory sequent-calculus
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $A_1, dots, A_n ,B_1, dots, B_m in mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ with $models lnot A_1 lor ldots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor ldots lor B_m$ ($mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ is the set of formulas built up from propositional variables and the connectives $lnot$ and $lor$). Show that this implies that the sequent $A_1, ldots, A_n vdash_G B_1, ldots, B_m$ is derivable in the Gentzen sequent calculus.
Use induction over the overall number of operators ($lor$ and $lnot$) in $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$.
Note: As a special case of the statement above we get: if $models B_1$ then $vdash_G B_1$ is derivable (for $B_1 in mathcal{F}_{lnot,lor}$).
I understand Gentzen sequence calculus. But I am unable to prove this using induction.
logic propositional-calculus proof-theory sequent-calculus
$endgroup$
Let $A_1, dots, A_n ,B_1, dots, B_m in mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ with $models lnot A_1 lor ldots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor ldots lor B_m$ ($mathcal{F}_{¬,lor}$ is the set of formulas built up from propositional variables and the connectives $lnot$ and $lor$). Show that this implies that the sequent $A_1, ldots, A_n vdash_G B_1, ldots, B_m$ is derivable in the Gentzen sequent calculus.
Use induction over the overall number of operators ($lor$ and $lnot$) in $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$.
Note: As a special case of the statement above we get: if $models B_1$ then $vdash_G B_1$ is derivable (for $B_1 in mathcal{F}_{lnot,lor}$).
I understand Gentzen sequence calculus. But I am unable to prove this using induction.
logic propositional-calculus proof-theory sequent-calculus
logic propositional-calculus proof-theory sequent-calculus
edited Jan 23 at 1:08
Taroccoesbrocco
5,64271840
5,64271840
asked Aug 20 '17 at 18:33
user2397555user2397555
365
365
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The proof of your statement is by induction on the number $k in mathbb{N}$ of occurrences of $lor$ and $lnot$ in the finite sequence of formulas $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$ (I refer to the inference rules for Gentzen sequent calculus listed here).
If $k = 0$ then all $A_i$'s and $B_j$'s are propositional variables.
Since $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$, there exist $1 leq i leq n$ and $1 leq j leq m$ such that $A_i = B_j$ (otherwise $ lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ is falsified by the valuation assigning true to all $A_i$'s and false to all $B_j$'s). Therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{dfrac{dfrac{}{A_i vdash B_j}text{ax}}{A_i vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_R text{ ($m-1$ times)}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_L text{ ($n-1$ times)}.
end{equation}
If $k > 0$ then there are four cases:
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = lnot A$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_{i-1} lor lnot A_{i+1} lor dots lor lnot A_n lor A lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, lnot A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lnot_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = A lor A'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot (A lor A') lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ and $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A' lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ and $A_1, dots, A', dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ are derivable;
therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m} qquad overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A lor A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lor_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = lnot B$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor lnot B lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor lnot B lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, lnot B, dots, B_m}lnot_R.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = B lor B'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor (B lor B') lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B lor B' lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B lor B', dots, B_m}lor_R.
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2400499%2fcompleteness-of-the-gentzen-sequent-calculus%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The proof of your statement is by induction on the number $k in mathbb{N}$ of occurrences of $lor$ and $lnot$ in the finite sequence of formulas $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$ (I refer to the inference rules for Gentzen sequent calculus listed here).
If $k = 0$ then all $A_i$'s and $B_j$'s are propositional variables.
Since $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$, there exist $1 leq i leq n$ and $1 leq j leq m$ such that $A_i = B_j$ (otherwise $ lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ is falsified by the valuation assigning true to all $A_i$'s and false to all $B_j$'s). Therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{dfrac{dfrac{}{A_i vdash B_j}text{ax}}{A_i vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_R text{ ($m-1$ times)}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_L text{ ($n-1$ times)}.
end{equation}
If $k > 0$ then there are four cases:
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = lnot A$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_{i-1} lor lnot A_{i+1} lor dots lor lnot A_n lor A lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, lnot A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lnot_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = A lor A'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot (A lor A') lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ and $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A' lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ and $A_1, dots, A', dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ are derivable;
therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m} qquad overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A lor A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lor_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = lnot B$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor lnot B lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor lnot B lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, lnot B, dots, B_m}lnot_R.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = B lor B'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor (B lor B') lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B lor B' lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B lor B', dots, B_m}lor_R.
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The proof of your statement is by induction on the number $k in mathbb{N}$ of occurrences of $lor$ and $lnot$ in the finite sequence of formulas $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$ (I refer to the inference rules for Gentzen sequent calculus listed here).
If $k = 0$ then all $A_i$'s and $B_j$'s are propositional variables.
Since $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$, there exist $1 leq i leq n$ and $1 leq j leq m$ such that $A_i = B_j$ (otherwise $ lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ is falsified by the valuation assigning true to all $A_i$'s and false to all $B_j$'s). Therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{dfrac{dfrac{}{A_i vdash B_j}text{ax}}{A_i vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_R text{ ($m-1$ times)}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_L text{ ($n-1$ times)}.
end{equation}
If $k > 0$ then there are four cases:
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = lnot A$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_{i-1} lor lnot A_{i+1} lor dots lor lnot A_n lor A lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, lnot A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lnot_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = A lor A'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot (A lor A') lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ and $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A' lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ and $A_1, dots, A', dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ are derivable;
therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m} qquad overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A lor A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lor_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = lnot B$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor lnot B lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor lnot B lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, lnot B, dots, B_m}lnot_R.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = B lor B'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor (B lor B') lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B lor B' lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B lor B', dots, B_m}lor_R.
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The proof of your statement is by induction on the number $k in mathbb{N}$ of occurrences of $lor$ and $lnot$ in the finite sequence of formulas $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$ (I refer to the inference rules for Gentzen sequent calculus listed here).
If $k = 0$ then all $A_i$'s and $B_j$'s are propositional variables.
Since $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$, there exist $1 leq i leq n$ and $1 leq j leq m$ such that $A_i = B_j$ (otherwise $ lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ is falsified by the valuation assigning true to all $A_i$'s and false to all $B_j$'s). Therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{dfrac{dfrac{}{A_i vdash B_j}text{ax}}{A_i vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_R text{ ($m-1$ times)}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_L text{ ($n-1$ times)}.
end{equation}
If $k > 0$ then there are four cases:
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = lnot A$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_{i-1} lor lnot A_{i+1} lor dots lor lnot A_n lor A lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, lnot A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lnot_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = A lor A'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot (A lor A') lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ and $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A' lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ and $A_1, dots, A', dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ are derivable;
therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m} qquad overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A lor A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lor_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = lnot B$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor lnot B lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor lnot B lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, lnot B, dots, B_m}lnot_R.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = B lor B'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor (B lor B') lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B lor B' lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B lor B', dots, B_m}lor_R.
end{equation}
$endgroup$
The proof of your statement is by induction on the number $k in mathbb{N}$ of occurrences of $lor$ and $lnot$ in the finite sequence of formulas $A_1, dots, A_n, B_1, dots, B_m$ (I refer to the inference rules for Gentzen sequent calculus listed here).
If $k = 0$ then all $A_i$'s and $B_j$'s are propositional variables.
Since $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$, there exist $1 leq i leq n$ and $1 leq j leq m$ such that $A_i = B_j$ (otherwise $ lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ is falsified by the valuation assigning true to all $A_i$'s and false to all $B_j$'s). Therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{dfrac{dfrac{}{A_i vdash B_j}text{ax}}{A_i vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_R text{ ($m-1$ times)}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}text{w}_L text{ ($n-1$ times)}.
end{equation}
If $k > 0$ then there are four cases:
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = lnot A$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_{i-1} lor lnot A_{i+1} lor dots lor lnot A_n lor A lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_{i-1}, A_{i+1}, dots A_n vdash A, B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, lnot A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lnot_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq i leq n$ such that $A_i = A lor A'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot (A lor A') lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$ and $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A' lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ and $A_1, dots, A', dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ are derivable;
therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A, dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m} qquad overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A lor A', dots A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m}lor_L.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = lnot B$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor lnot B lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor lnot B lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n, B vdash B_1, dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, lnot B, dots, B_m}lnot_R.
end{equation}
- There exists $1 leq j leq m$ such that $B_j = B lor B'$.
As $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B_1 lor dots lor (B lor B') lor dots lor B_m$ by hypothesis, then $models lnot A_1 lor dots lor lnot A_n lor B lor B' lor B_1 lor dots lor B_m$.
By induction hypothesis, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m$ is derivable; therefore, $A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B_m$ is derivable, for instance by the following derivation
begin{equation}
dfrac{overset{vdots}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B, B', dots, B_m}}{A_1, dots, A_n vdash B_1, dots, B lor B', dots, B_m}lor_R.
end{equation}
answered Jan 23 at 1:06
TaroccoesbroccoTaroccoesbrocco
5,64271840
5,64271840
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2400499%2fcompleteness-of-the-gentzen-sequent-calculus%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown