BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Daniel Weller

Daniel Weller contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceHuman-Computer Interactionmath.LOMathematical Software

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2014arXiv

Algorithmic Introduction of Quantified Cuts

We describe a method for inverting Gentzen's cut-elimination in classical first-order logic. Our algorithm is based on first computign a compressed representation of the terms present in the cut-free proof and then cut-formulas that realize such a compression. Finally, a proof using these cut-formulas is constructed. This method allows an exponential compression of proof length. It can be applied to the output of automated theorem provers, which typically produce analytic proofs. An implementation is available on the web and described in this paper.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Introducing Quantified Cuts in Logic with Equality

Cut-introduction is a technique for structuring and compressing formal proofs. In this paper we generalize our cut-introduction method for the introduction of quantified lemmas of the form $\forall x.A$ (for quantifier-free $A$) to a method generating lemmas of the form $\forall x_1\ldots\forall x_n.A$. Moreover, we extend the original method to predicate logic with equality. The new method was implemented and applied to the TSTP proof database. It is shown that the extension of the method to handle equality and quantifier-blocks leads to a substantial improvement of the old algorithm.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

CERES for First-Order Schemata

The cut-elimination method CERES (for first- and higher-order classical logic) is based on the notion of a characteristic clause set, which is extracted from an LK-proof and is always unsatisfiable. A resolution refutation of this clause set can be used as a skeleton for a proof with atomic cuts only (atomic cut normal form). This is achieved by replacing clauses from the resolution refutation by the corresponding projections of the original proof. We present a generalization of CERES (called CERESs) to first-order proof schemata and define a schematic version of the sequent calculus called LKS, and a notion of proof schema based on primitive recursive definitions. A method is developed to extract schematic characteristic clause sets and schematic projections from these proof schemata. We also define a schematic resolution calculus for refutation of schemata of clause sets, which can be applied to refute the schematic characteristic clause sets. Finally the projection schemata and resolution schemata are plugged together and a schematic representation of the atomic cut normal forms is obtained. A major benefit of CERESs is the extension of cut-elimination to inductively defined proofs: we compare CERESs with standard calculi using induction rules and demonstrate that CERESs is capable of performing cut-elimination where traditional methods fail. The algorithmic handling of CERESs is supported by a recent extension of the CERES system.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Expansion Trees with Cut

Herbrand's theorem is one of the most fundamental insights in logic. From the syntactic point of view it suggests a compact representation of proofs in classical first- and higher-order logic by recording the information which instances have been chosen for which quantifiers, known in the literature as expansion trees. Such a representation is inherently analytic and hence corresponds to a cut-free sequent calculus proof. Recently several extensions of such proof representations to proofs with cut have been proposed. These extensions are based on graphical formalisms similar to proof nets and are limited to prenex formulas. In this paper we present a new approach that directly extends expansion trees by cuts and covers also non-prenex formulas. We describe a cut-elimination procedure for our expansion trees with cut that is based on the natural reduction steps. We prove that it is weakly normalizing using methods from the epsilon-calculus.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

PROOFTOOL: a GUI for the GAPT Framework

This paper introduces PROOFTOOL, the graphical user interface for the General Architecture for Proof Theory (GAPT) framework. Its features are described with a focus not only on the visualization but also on the analysis and transformation of proofs and related tree-like structures, and its implementation is explained. Finally, PROOFTOOL is compared with three other graphical interfaces for proofs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access