Documentation

InfinitaryLogic.Admissible.ProofSystem

Proof System for Admissible Fragments #

This file defines a proof system for admissible fragments of Lω₁ω. The system is Prop-valued (no proof terms) and operates on sentences.

Main Definitions #

Main Results #

Design Notes #

The system is sentence-level (not bounded formulas with parameters). The quantifier rules use the omega-rule: all_intro requires derivability of all substitution instances, and all_elim extracts one instance.

Derivability in an admissible fragment. Prop-valued (no proof terms).

The system includes structural rules, propositional rules, infinitary connective rules, quantifier rules (omega-rule), equality rules, and classical logic (LEM).

Instances For

    Basic lemmas #

    theorem FirstOrder.Language.Derivable.mono {L : Language} {φ : L.Sentenceω} {A : L.AdmissibleFragment} {T T' : Set L.Sentenceω} (h : T T') (hd : Derivable A T φ) :
    Derivable A T' φ

    Derivability is monotone in the theory.

    theorem FirstOrder.Language.AConsistent.mono {L : Language} {A : L.AdmissibleFragment} {T T' : Set L.Sentenceω} (h : T' T) (hc : AConsistent A T) :

    Consistency is antitone: subsets of consistent sets are consistent.

    A consistent theory does not contain ⊥.

    theorem FirstOrder.Language.AConsistent.no_contradiction {L : Language} {φ : L.Sentenceω} {A : L.AdmissibleFragment} {T : Set L.Sentenceω} (hc : AConsistent A T) ( : φ T) (hφA : φ A.formulas) :

    A consistent theory does not contain both φ and ¬φ.

    Negation introduction: if T ∪ {φ} ⊢ ⊥, then T ⊢ ¬φ.

    Negation elimination: if T ⊢ φ and T ⊢ ¬φ, then T ⊢ ⊥.

    If S ⊢ χ and S ∪ {χ} ⊢ ⊥, then S ⊢ ⊥.

    If S ∪ {φ} ⊢ ⊥ and S ∪ {¬φ} ⊢ ⊥, then S ⊢ ⊥.

    If S ⊢ ¬φ and φ, ψ ∈ A.formulas, then S ⊢ φ → ψ.

    If S ⊆ A.formulas, AConsistent A S, and φ ∈ A.formulas, then AConsistent A (S ∪ {φ}) ∨ AConsistent A (S ∪ {¬φ}).