Deep inference is a proof theoretic methodology that generalizes the standard notion of inference of the sequent calculus, whereby inference rules become applicable at any depth inside logical expressions. Deep inference provides more freedom in the design of deductive systems for different logics and a rich combinatoric analysis of proofs. In particular, construction of exponentially shorter a...

the control of hydraulic jump through thin-crested sills in a trapezoidal channel was studied theoretically as well as experimentally. the experiments were conducted in a specially designed stilling basin for 1:1 side slope. the results show that for a given side slope, end sill increases the stability of the jump within the stilling basin. it also causes a 13-15 percent reduction in the length...

Nested sequent systems for modal logics were introduced by Kai Brünnler, and have come to be seen as an attractive deep reasoning extension of familiar sequent calculi. In an earlier paper I showed there was a connection between modal nested sequents and modal prefixed tableaus. In this paper I extend the nested sequent machinery to intuitionistic logic, both standard and constant domain, and r...

In the previous chapter we developed linear logic in the form of natural deduction , which is appropriate for many applications of linear logic. It is also highly economical, in that we only needed one basic judgment (A true) and two judgment forms (linear and unrestricted hypothetical judgments) to explain the meaning of all connectives we have encountered so far. However, it is not immediatel...

In this paper we focus on proof methods and theorem proving for normal conditional logics, by describing nested sequent calculi as well as a theorem prover for them. Nested sequent calculi are a useful generalization of ordinary sequent calculi, where sequents are allowed to occur within sequents. Nested sequent calculi have been profitably employed in the area of (multi)-modal logic to obtain ...

The sequent calculus is often criticized for requiring proofs to contain large amounts of lowlevel syntactic details that can obscure the essence of a given proof. Because each inference rule introduces only a single connective, sequent proofs can separate closely related steps—such as instantiating a block of quantifiers—by irrelevant noise. Moreover, the sequential nature of sequent proofs fo...