I'm working on using semantic tableau to prove properties of formulas. I've got the hang of building them, but there's some theory I'm unsure of.
I'm aware that to a formula can be proven unsatisfiable if all branches are closed.
I'm also aware that a formula can be proven valid if the negation of that formula is proven unsatisfiable like done so above.
But how can I prove that a formula is both satisfiable and falsifiable?
I'm sure it can be done by proving that a formula is not unsatisfiable and not valid. But is there a shorter way? Or is it common practice to prove the formula to be both not unsatisfiable and not valid?
This is indeed done by two trees: one where $\phi$ leads to at least one open and finished branch (showing satisfiablity of $\phi$), and one where $\neg \phi$ leads to at least one open and finished branch (showing falsifiablity of $\phi$)