Question

How to state precisely this requirement relative to the application of natural deduction rules?

score 60 · Answer 1 · 2020-12-11 09:58:59

60

Views

How to state precisely this requirement relative to the application of natural deduction rules?

Published on 11 Dec 2020 - 9:58

score 44 · Answer 2 · 2020-12-23 08:02:29

44

Views

Can an assumption be discharged without it being part of the tree?

Published on 23 Dec 2020 - 8:02

score 515 · Answer 3 · 2026-03-26 20:40:38

515

Views

Course-of-values induction, according to Kleene IM (1952)

Published on 26 Mar 2026 - 20:40

score 138 · Answer 4 · 2021-01-06 10:40:02

138

Views

Metalogical motivations for logical inference rules?

Published on 06 Jan 2021 - 10:40

score 166 · Answer 5 · 2021-01-15 02:06:27

166

Views

Is disjunction elimination a more general form of modus ponens?

Published on 15 Jan 2021 - 2:06

score 167 · Answer 6 · 2021-01-18 15:06:11

167

Views

Natural Deduction proof using basic rules only

Published on 18 Jan 2021 - 15:06

score 280 · Answer 7 · 2026-03-29 05:42:46

280

Views

Formal proof for first-order logic question using natural deduction

Published on 29 Mar 2026 - 5:42

score 79 · Answer 8 · 2021-02-07 11:59:38

79

Views

$v(\phi \vee \psi)=1 \iff \phi \vee \psi \in \Gamma^*$

Published on 07 Feb 2021 - 11:59

score 94 · Answer 9 · 2021-02-11 18:06:13

94

Views

Give syntax proof of $\forall x (P(x) \lor Q(x))$ , $\forall y. \neg P(y)$ $\vdash$ $\forall x.Q(x)$

Published on 11 Feb 2021 - 18:06

score 77 · Answer 10 · 2021-02-12 17:50:37

77

Views

Give syntax proof of FOL Formla $\exists x.P(x) \lor \exists x.Q(x)$ $\vdash$ $\exists x.(P(x) \lor Q(x))$

Published on 12 Feb 2021 - 17:50

score 135 · Answer 11 · 2021-02-24 10:39:26

135

Views

$\vdash (\lnot \chi \to \lnot \theta) \to (\theta \to \chi) $

Published on 24 Feb 2021 - 10:39

score 324 · Answer 12 · 2021-02-28 23:15:36

324

Views

Proof in FOL with no CQ rule

Published on 28 Feb 2021 - 23:15

score 132 · Answer 13 · 2021-03-01 07:30:56

132

Views

Universal elimination when $\forall$ is not the main operator

Published on 01 Mar 2021 - 7:30

score 1.9k · Answer 14 · 2021-03-07 19:50:03

1.9k

Views

Fitch-Style Proof ¬(A → B) → (A ∧ ¬B)

Published on 07 Mar 2021 - 19:50

score 178 · Answer 15 · 2021-03-10 13:02:44

178

Views

Motivation for proof of $(((\phi \to \psi) \to \phi) \to \phi)$

Published on 10 Mar 2021 - 13:02

List Question

How to state precisely this requirement relative to the application of natural deduction rules?

Can an assumption be discharged without it being part of the tree?

Course-of-values induction, according to Kleene IM (1952)

Metalogical motivations for logical inference rules?

Is disjunction elimination a more general form of modus ponens?

Natural Deduction proof using basic rules only

Formal proof for first-order logic question using natural deduction

$v(\phi \vee \psi)=1 \iff \phi \vee \psi \in \Gamma^*$

Give syntax proof of $\forall x (P(x) \lor Q(x))$ , $\forall y. \neg P(y)$ $\vdash$ $\forall x.Q(x)$

Give syntax proof of FOL Formla $\exists x.P(x) \lor \exists x.Q(x)$ $\vdash$ $\exists x.(P(x) \lor Q(x))$

$\vdash (\lnot \chi \to \lnot \theta) \to (\theta \to \chi) $

Proof in FOL with no CQ rule

Universal elimination when $\forall$ is not the main operator

Fitch-Style Proof ¬(A → B) → (A ∧ ¬B)

Motivation for proof of $(((\phi \to \psi) \to \phi) \to \phi)$

Trending Questions

Popular # Hahtags

Popular Questions