Dual Erotetic Calculi and the Minimal LFI

Studia Logica 103 (6):1245-1278 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An erotetic calculus for a given logic constitutes a sequent-style proof-theoretical formalization of the logic grounded in Inferential Erotetic Logic ). In this paper, a new erotetic calculus for Classical Propositional Logic ), dual with respect to the existing ones, is given. We modify the calculus to obtain complete proof systems for the propositional part of paraconsistent logic CLuN and its extensions CLuNs and mbC. The method is based on dual resolution. Moreover, the resolution rule is non-clausal. According to the authors knowledge, this is the first account of resolution for mbC. Last but not least, as the method is grounded in IEL, it constitutes an important tool for the so-called question-processing

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,951

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-06-02

Downloads
75 (#305,446)

6 months
9 (#461,271)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

First-order logic.Raymond Merrill Smullyan - 1968 - New York [etc.]: Springer Verlag.
Structural Proof Theory.Sara Negri, Jan von Plato & Aarne Ranta - 2001 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Jan Von Plato.
The Posing of Questions: Logical Foundations of Erotetic Inferences.Andrzej Wiśniewski - 1995 - Dordrecht and Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
A Machine-Oriented Logic based on the Resolution Principle.J. A. Robinson - 1966 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 31 (3):515-516.

View all 16 references / Add more references