In intuitionistic logic, the Harrop formulae, named after Ronald Harrop, are the class of formulae inductively defined as follows:[1][2][3]
- Atomic formulae are Harrop, including falsity (⊥);
- is Harrop provided and are;
- is Harrop for any well-formed formula ;
- is Harrop provided is, and is any well-formed formula;
- is Harrop provided is.
By excluding disjunction and existential quantification (except in the antecedent of implication), non-constructive predicates are avoided, which has benefits for computer implementation.
Discussion
Harrop formulae are "well-behaved" also in a constructive context. For example, in Heyting arithmetic , Harrop formulae satisfy a classical equivalence not generally satisfied in constructive logic:[1]
There are however -statements that are -independent, meaning these are simple statements for which excluded middle is not -provable. Indeed, while intuitionistic logic proves for any , the disjunction will not be Harrop.
A more complex definition of hereditary Harrop formulae is used in logic programming as a generalisation of Horn clauses, and forms the basis for the language λProlog. Hereditary Harrop formulae are defined in terms of two (sometimes three) recursive sets of formulae. In one formulation:[4]
- Rigid atomic formulae, i.e. constants or formulae , are hereditary Harrop;
- is hereditary Harrop provided and are;
- is hereditary Harrop provided is;
- is hereditary Harrop provided is rigidly atomic, and is a G-formula.
G-formulae are defined as follows:[4]
- Atomic formulae are G-formulae, including truth(⊤);
- is a G-formula provided and are;
- is a G-formula provided and are;
- is a G-formula provided is;
- is a G-formula provided is;
- is a G-formula provided is, and is hereditary Harrop.
History
Harrop formulae were introduced around 1956 by Ronald Harrop and independently by Helena Rasiowa.[2] Variations of the fundamental concept are used in different branches of constructive mathematics and logic programming.
See also
References