In abstract algebraic logic, the general study of propositional non-classical logics has been traditionally based on the abstraction of the Lindenbaum-Tarski process. In this process one considers the Leibniz relation of indiscernible formulae. Such approach has resulted in a classification of logics partly based on generalizations of equivalence connectives: the Leibniz hierarchy. This paper performs an analogous abstract study of non-classical logics based on the kind of generalized implication connectives they possess. It yields a new classification of logics expanding Leibniz (...) hierarchy: the hierarchy of implicational logics. In this framework the notion of implicational semilinear logic can be naturally introduced as a property of the implication, namely a logic L is an implicational semilinear logic iff it has an implication such that L is complete w.r.t. the matrices where the implication induces a linear order, a property which is typically satisfied by well-known systems of fuzzy logic. The hierarchy of implicational logics is then restricted to the semilinear case obtaining a classification of implicational semilinear logics that encompasses almost all the known examples of fuzzy logics and suggests new directions for research in the field. (shrink)

We present a finitary regularly algebraizable logic not finitely equivalential, for every similarity type. We associate to each of these logics a class of algebras with an equivalence relation, with the property that in this class, the identity is atomatically definable but not finitely atomatically definable.

Most Gentzen systems arising in logic contain few axiom schemata and many rule schemata. Hilbert systems, on the other hand, usually contain few proper inference rules and possibly many axioms. Because of this, the two notions tend to serve different purposes. It is common for a logic to be specified in the first instance by means of a Gentzen calculus, whereupon a Hilbert-style presentation ‘for’ the logic may be sought—or vice versa. Where this has occurred, the word ‘for’ has taken (...) on several different meanings, partly because the Gentzen separator ⇒ can be interpreted intuitively in a number of ways. Here ⇒ will be denoted less evocatively by ⊲.In this paper we aim to discuss some of the useful ways in which Gentzen and Hilbert systems may correspond to each other. Actually, we shall be concerned with thededucibility relationsof the formal systems, as it is these that are susceptible to transformation in useful ways. To avoid potential confusion, we shall speak of Hilbert and Gentzenrelations. By aHilbert relationwe mean any substitution-invariant consequence relation onformulas—this comes to the same thing as the deducibility relation of a set of Hilbert-style axioms and rules. By aGentzen relationwe mean the fully fledged generalization of this notion in whichsequentstake the place of single formulas. In the literature, Hilbert relations are often referred to assentential logics. Gentzen relations as defined here are their exactsequentialcounterparts. (shrink)