We introduce necessary and sufficient conditions for a (single-conclusion) sequent calculus to admit (reductive) cut-elimination. Our conditions are formulated both syntactically and semantically.

We develop a general algebraic and proof-theoretic study of substructural logics that may lack associativity, along with other structural rules. Our study extends existing work on substructural logics over the full Lambek Calculus [34], Galatos and Ono [18], Galatos et al. [17]). We present a Gentzen-style sequent system that lacks the structural rules of contraction, weakening, exchange and associativity, and can be considered a non-associative formulation of . Moreover, we introduce an equivalent Hilbert-style system and show that the logic associated (...) with and is algebraizable, with the variety of residuated lattice-ordered groupoids with unit serving as its equivalent algebraic semantics. Overcoming technical complications arising from the lack of associativity, we introduce a generalized version of a logical matrix and apply the method of quasicompletions to obtain an algebra and a quasiembedding from the matrix to the algebra. By applying the general result to specific cases, we obtain important logical and algebraic properties, including the cut elimination of and various extensions, the strong separation of , and the finite generation of the variety of residuated lattice-ordered groupoids with unit. (shrink)

To investigate the relationship between logical reasoning and majority voting, we introduce logic with groups Lg in the style of Gentzen’s sequent calculus, where every sequent is indexed by a group of individuals. We also introduce the set-theoretical semantics of Lg, where every formula is interpreted as a certain closed set of groups whose members accept that formula. We present the cut-elimination theorem, and the soundness and semantic completeness theorems of Lg. Then, introducing an inference rule representing majority voting to (...) Lg, we introduce logic with majority voting Lv. Formalizing the discursive paradox in judgment aggregation theory, we show that Lv is inconsistent. Based on the premise-based and conclusion-based approaches to avoid the paradox, we introduce logic with majority voting for axioms Lva, where majority voting is applied only to non-logical axioms as premises to construct a proof in Lg, and logic with majority voting for conclusions Lvc, where majority voting is applied only to the conclusion of a proof in Lg. We show that both Lva and Lvc are syntactically complete and consistent, and we construct collective judgments based on the provability in Lva and Lvc, respectively. Then, we discuss how these systems avoid the discursive paradox. (shrink)

We study the sequent system mentioned in the author's work as CyInFL with ‘intuitionistic’ sequents. We explore the connection between this system and symmetric constructive logic of Zaslavsky and develop an algebraic semantics for both of them. In contrast to the previous work, we prove the strong completeness theorem for CyInFL with ‘intuitionistic’ sequents and all of its basic variants, including variants with contraction. We also show how the defined classes of structures are related to cyclic involutive FL‐algebras and Nelson (...) FLew‐algebras. In particular, we prove the definitional equivalence of symmetric constructive FLewc‐algebras (algebraic models of symmetric constructive logic) and Nelson FLew‐algebras (algebras introduced by Spinks and Veroff, as the termwise equivalent definition of Nelson algebras). Because of the strong completeness theorem that covers all basic variants of CyInFL with ‘intuitionistic’ sequents, we rename this sequent system to symmetric constructive full Lambek calculus (). We verify the decidability of this system and its basic variants, as we did in the case of their distributive cousins. As a consequence we obtain that the corresponding theories of (distributive and nondistributive) symmetric constructive FL‐algebras are decidable. (shrink)

We develop a Gentzen-style proof theory for super-Belnap logics, expanding on an approach initiated by Pynko. We show that just like substructural logics may be understood proof-theoretically as logics which relax the structural rules of classical logic but keep its logical rules as well as the rules of Identity and Cut, super-Belnap logics may be seen as logics which relax Identity and Cut but keep the logical rules as well as the structural rules of classical logic. A generalization of the (...) cut elimination theorem for classical propositional logic is then proved and used to establish interpolation for various super-Belnap logics. In particular, we obtain an alternative syntactic proof of a refinement of the Craig interpolation theorem for classical propositional logic discovered recently by Milne. (shrink)

We introduce necessary and sufficient conditions for a (single-conclusion) sequent calculus to admit (reductive) cut-elimination. Our conditions are formulated both syntactically and semantically.