Skip to main content
Log in

Classical Natural Deduction for S4 Modal Logic

  • Published:
New Generation Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a natural deduction system CNDS4 for classical S4 modal logic with necessity and possibility modalities. This new system is an extension of Parigot’s Classical Natural Deduction with dualcontext to formulate S4 modal logic. The modal λμ-calculus is also introduced as a computational extraction of CNDS4. It is an extension of both the λμ-calculus and the modal λ-calculus. Subject reduction, confluency, and strong normalization of the modal λμ-calculus are shown. Finally, the computational interpretation of the modal λμ-calculus, especially the computational meaning of the modal possibility operator, is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bierman, G. M. and De Paiva, V., “On an intuitionistic modal logic,” Studia Logica, 65, 3, pp. 383-416, 2000.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Curien, P. L. and Herbelin, H., “The duality of computation,” in Proc. of the 5th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP, pp. 233-243, 2000.

  3. Davies, R., “A temporal-logic approach to binding-time analysis,” in Proc. of 11 th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 184-195, 1996.

  4. Davies, R. and Pfenning, F., “A modal analysis of staged computation,” Journal of the ACM, 48, 3, pp. 555-604, 2001.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. De Groote, P., “On the relation between the lambda-mu-calculus and the syntactic theory of sequential control,” in Proc. of the 5th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, LPAR ’94, LNCS, 822, pp. 31-43, 1994.

  6. Ghani, N., De Paiva, V. and Ritter, E., “Explicit Substitutions for Constructive Necessity,” in The 25th International Colloquium, Automata, Languages and Programming, Denmark, pp. 743-754, 1998.

  7. Griffin, T. G., “A formulae-as-types notion of control,” in Proc. of the 1990 Principles of Programming Languages Conference, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 47-58, 1990.

  8. Groote, P. D., “An environment machine for the λμ-calculus,” Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 8, 6, pp. 637-669, 1998.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Kakutani, Y., “Duality between Call-by-Name Recursion and Call-by-Value Iteration,” in Proc. of the 16th International Workshop on Computer Science Logic, CSL, LNCS, 2471, pp. 506-521, 2002.

  10. Kakutani, Y., “Call-by-Name and Call-by-Value in Normal Modal Logic,” in Proc. of Programming Languages and Systems, 5th Asian Symposium, APLAS, LNCS, 4807, pp. 399-414, 2007.

  11. Kimura, D., “Duality between Call-by-value Reductions and Call-by-name Reductions,” IPSJ Journal, 48, 4, pp. 1721-1757, 2007.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. De Paz, M., Medeiros, N., “A new S4 classical modal logic in natural deduction,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, 71, 3, pp. 799-809, 2006

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Nanevski, A., “A Modal Calculus for Exception Handling,” in the 3rd intuitionistic modal logics and applications workshop, 2005.

  14. Newman, M. H. A., “On theories with a combinatorial definition of “equivalence”,” Annals of Mathematics, 43, 2, pp. 223-243, 1942.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Ong, C.-H. L. and Stewart, C. A., “A Curry-Howard foundation for functional computation with control,” in Proc. of the Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 215-227, 1997.

  16. Parigot, M., “λμ-calculus: an algorithmic interpretation of classical natural deduction,” in Proc. of International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Deduction, LNCS, 624, pp. 190-201, 1992.

  17. Parigot, M., “Strong normalization for second order classical natural deduction,” in Proc. of Eighth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 39-46, 1993.

  18. Pfenning, F. and Davies, R., “A judgmental reconstruction of modal logic,” Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 11, pp. 511-540, 2001.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Prawitz, D., Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1965.

  20. Selinger, P., “Control Categories and Duality: on the Categorical Semantics of the Lambda-Mu Calculus,” Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, pp. 207-260, 2001.

  21. Shan, C.-C., “A Computational Interpretation of Classical S4 Modal Logic,” in The 3rd intuitionistic modal logics and applications workshop, 2005.

  22. Taha, W. and Sheard, T., “MetaML and multi-stage programming with explicit annotations,” Theoretical Computer Science, 248, 1-2, pp. 211-242, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Wadler, P., “Call-by-Value is Dual to Call-by-Name - Reloaded,” in Rewriting Techniques and Applications, Japan, LNCS, 3467, pp. 185-203, 2005.

  24. Yuse, Y. and Igarashi, A., “A modal type system for multi-level generating extensions with persistent code,” in Proc. of the 8th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, pp. 201-212, 2006.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daisuke Kimura.

About this article

Cite this article

Kimura, D., Kakutani, Y. Classical Natural Deduction for S4 Modal Logic. New Gener. Comput. 29, 61–86 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00354-010-0099-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00354-010-0099-3

Keywords:

Navigation