Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-5xszh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T04:28:47.473Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cut-elimination for simple type theory with an axiom of choice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

G. Mints*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA E-mail: mints@csli.stanford.edu

Abstract

We present a cut-elimination proof for simple type theory with an axiom of choice formulated in the language with an epsilon-symbol. The proof is modeled after Takahashi's proof of cut-elimination for simple type theory with extensionality. The same proof works when types are restricted, for example for second-order classical logic with an axiom of choice.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] Mints, G., Review of [6], Zentralblatt für Mathematik, vol. 381 (1979), #03042.Google Scholar
[2] Mints, G., A normal form theorem for second-order classical logic with an axiom of choice, Math. USSR Izvestiya, vol. 32, No. 3 (1989), pp. 587–605.Google Scholar
[3] Mints, G., Tupailo, S., and Buchholz, W., Epsilon substitution method for elementary analysis, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 35 (1996), pp. 103–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Takahashi, M., Simple type theory ofGentzen style with the inference of extensionality, Proceedings of the Japanese Academy of Sciences, vol. 44 (1968), pp. 43–45.Google Scholar
[5] Takeuti, G., Proof theory, North-Holland, 1987.Google Scholar
[6] Wessels, L., Cut elimination in a Gentzen-style ε-calculus, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logic und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 23 (1977), pp. 527–538.Google Scholar
[7] Yasuhara, M., Cut elimination in ε-calculi, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logic und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 28 (1982), pp. 311–316.Google Scholar