Combining Hilbert style and semantic reasoning in a resolution framework

  • Hans Jürgen Ohlbach
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1421)


Many non-classical logics can be axiomatized by means of Hilbert Systems. Reasoning in Hilbert Systems, however, is extremely inefficient. Most inference methods therefore use the semantics of a logic in one kind or another to get more efficiency. In this paper a combination of Hilbert style and semantic reasoning is proposed. It is particularly tailored for cases where either the semantics of some operators is not known, or it is second-order, or it is just too complicated to handle, or flexibility in experimenting with different versions of a logic is required. First-order predicate logic is used as a meta-logic for combining the Hilbert part with the semantics part. Reasoning is done in a (theory) resolution framework. The basic method is applicable to many different (monotonic prepositional) non-classical logics. It can, however, be improved by treating particular formulae in a special way, as rewrite rules, as theory unification or theory resolution rules, even as recursive calls to a theorem prover. Examples for all these cases are presented in the paper.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chris Brink, Dov Gabbay, and Hans Jürgen Ohlbach. Towards Automating Duality. Journal of Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 29(2):73–90, 1994.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. F. Chellas. Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dov M. Gabbay. Self fibring in predicate logics, fibred semantics and the weaving of logics, part 4, 1996. manuscript.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dov M. Gabbay and Hans Jürgen Ohlbach. Quantifier elimination in second-order predicate logic. In Bernhard Nebel, Charles Rich, and William Swartout, editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR92), pages 425–435. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maria Manzano. Extensions of First Order Logic. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science 19, Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williman McCune and Larry Wos. Experiments in automated deduction with condensed detachment. In Deepak Kapur, editor, Automated Deduction — CADE 11, Lecture Notes in AI, vol. 607, pages 209–223. Springer Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andreas Nonnengart. A Resolution-Based Calculus for Temporal Logics. PhD thesis, UniversitÄt des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany, December 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hans Jürgen Ohlbach. Semantics based translation methods for modal logics. Journal of Logic and Computation, 1(5):691–746, 1991.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Renate A. Schmidt. Optimised Modal Translation and Resolution. PhD thesis, Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrücken, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johan van Benthem. Correspondence theory. In Gabbay Dov M. and Franz Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. II, Extensions of Classical Logic, Synthese Library Vol. 165, pages 167–248. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Jürgen Ohlbach
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of ComputingImperial CollegeLondon

Personalised recommendations