BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Stefan Hetzl contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
We consider a typical integration of induction in saturation-based theorem provers and investigate the effects of Skolem symbols occurring in the induction formulas. In a practically relevant setting we establish a Skolem-free characterization of refutation in saturation-based proof systems with induction. Finally, we use this characterization to obtain unprovability results for a concrete saturation-based induction prover.
The notion of clause set cycle abstracts a family of methods for automated inductive theorem proving based on the detection of cyclic dependencies between clause sets. By discerning the underlying logical features of clause set cycles, we are able to characterize clause set cycles by a logical theory. We make use of this characterization to provide practically relevant unprovability results for clause set cycles that exploit different logical features.
We present a structural representation of the Herbrand content of LK-proofs with cuts of complexity prenex Sigma-2/Pi-2. The representation takes the form of a typed non-deterministic tree grammar of order 2 which generates a finite language of first-order terms that appear in the Herbrand expansions obtained through cut-elimination. In particular, for every Gentzen-style reduction between LK-proofs we study the induced grammars and classify the cases in which language equality and inclusion hold.
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.
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.
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.
We consider cut-elimination in the sequent calculus for classical first-order logic. It is well known that this system, in its most general form, is neither confluent nor strongly normalizing. In this work we take a coarser (and mathematically more realistic) look at cut-free proofs. We analyze which witnesses they choose for which quantifiers, or in other words: we only consider the Herbrand-disjunction of a cut-free proof. Our main theorem is a confluence result for a natural class of proofs: all (possibly infinitely many) normal forms of the non-erasing reduction lead to the same Herbrand-disjunction.