Analytic Methods for the Logic of Proofs

The logic of proofs (lp) was proposed as Gdels missed link between Intuitionistic and S4-proofs, but so far the tableau-based methods proposed for lp have not explored this closeness with S4 and contain rules whose analycity is not immediately evident. We study possible formulations of analytic tableau proof methods for lp that preserve the subformula property. Two sound and complete tableau decision methods of increasing degree of analycity are proposed, KELP and preKELP. The latter is particularly inspired on S4-proofs. The crucial role of proof constants in the structure of lp-proofs methods is analysed. In particular, a method for the abduction of proof constant specifications in strongly analytic preKELP proofs is presented; abduction heuristics and the complexity of the method are discussed.

A Note on the Use of Sum in the Logic of Proofs

The Logic of Proofs~LP, introduced by Artemov, encodes the same reasoning as the modal logic~S4 using proofs explicitly present in the language. In particular, Artemov showed that three operations on proofs (application~$\cdot$, positive introspection~!, and sum~+) are sufficient to mimic provability concealed in S4~modality. While the first two operations go back to G{\"o}del, the exact role of~+ remained somewhat unclear. In particular, it was not known whether the other two operations are sufficient by themselves. We provide a positive answer to this question under a very weak restriction on the axiomatization of LP.

Visualizing a logic of dependability arguments

This paper offers general guidelines for the development of effective visual languages. That is, languages for constructing diagrams that can be easily and readily interpreted and manipulated by the human reader. We use these guidelines first to examine classical AND/OR trees as a representation of logical proofs, and second to design and evaluate a visual language for representing proofs in LofA: a Logic of Dependability Arguments, for which we provide a brief motivation and overview.

The logic of ADHD : a brief review of fallacious reasoning

This paper has two central purposes: the first is to survey some of the more important examples of fallacious argument, and the second is to examine the frequent use of these fallacies in support of the psychological construct: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The paper divides 12 familiar fallacies into three different categories—material, psychological and logical—and contends that advocates of ADHD often seem to employ these fallacies to support their position. It is suggested that all researchers, whether into ADHD or otherwise, need to pay much closer attention to the construction of their arguments if they are not to make truth claims unsupported by satisfactory evidence, form or logic.