PROOF ANALYSIS for LEWIS COUNTERFACTUALS
Review of Symbolic Logic, ISSN: 1755-0211, Vol: 9, Issue: 1, Page: 44-75
2016
- 12Citations
- 5Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
A deductive system for Lewis counterfactuals is presented, based directly on the influential generalisation of relational semantics through ternary similarity relations introduced by Lewis. This deductive system builds on a method of enriching the syntax of sequent calculus by labels for possible worlds. The resulting labelled sequent calculus is shown to be equivalent to the axiomatic system VC of Lewis. It is further shown to have the structural properties that are needed for an analytic proof system that supports root-first proof search. Completeness of the calculus is proved in a direct way, such that for any given sequent either a formal derivation or a countermodel is provided; it is also shown how finite countermodels for unprovable sequents can be extracted from failed proof search, by which the completeness proof turns into a proof of decidability.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84962302779&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1755020315000295; http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1755020315000295; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1755020315000295; https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1755020315000295/type/journal_article; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-symbolic-logic/article/proof-analysis-for-lewis-counterfactuals/7EF0D7E35DBC4568060429D46160422A
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know