•  26
    Diagonalização, Paradoxos e o Teorema de Löb
    Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 73 (3-4): 1169-1188. 2017.
    Diagonalization is a transversal theme in Logic. In this work, it is shown that there exists a common origin of several diagonalization phenomena — paradoxes and Löb's Theorem. That common origin comprises a common reasoning and a common logical structure. We analyse the common structure from a philosophical point-of-view and we draw some conclusions.
  •  11
    K-Provability in $$\hbox {PA}$$ PA
    Logica Universalis 15 (4): 477-516. 2021.
    We study the decidability of k-provability in \—the relation ‘being provable in \ with at most k steps’—and the decidability of the proof-skeleton problem—the problem of deciding if a given formula has a proof that has a given skeleton. The decidability of k-provability for the usual Hilbert-style formalisation of \ is still an open problem, but it is known that the proof-skeleton problem is undecidable for that theory. Using new methods, we present a characterisation of some numbers k for which…Read more
  •  8
    Paradoxes, Intuitionism, and Proof-Theoretic Semantics
    In Thomas Piecha & Kai F. Wehmeier (eds.), Peter Schroeder-Heister on Proof-Theoretic Semantics, Springer. pp. 363-374. 2024.
    In this note, we review paradoxes like Russell’s, the Liar, and Curry’s in the context of intuitionistic logic. One may observe that one cannot blame the underlying logic for the paradoxes, but has to take into account the particular concept formations. For proof-theoretic semantics, however, this comes with the challenge to block some forms of direct axiomatizations of the Liar. A proper answer to this challenge might be given by Schroeder-Heister’s definitional freedom.
  •  7
    Variants of Kreisel’s Conjecture on a New Notion of Provability
    Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 27 (4): 337-350. 2021.
    Kreisel’s conjecture is the statement: if, for all$n\in \mathbb {N}$,$\mathop {\text {PA}} \nolimits \vdash _{k \text { steps}} \varphi (\overline {n})$, then$\mathop {\text {PA}} \nolimits \vdash \forall x.\varphi (x)$. For a theory of arithmeticT, given a recursive functionh,$T \vdash _{\leq h} \varphi $holds if there is a proof of$\varphi $inTwhose code is at most$h(\#\varphi )$. This notion depends on the underlying coding.${P}^h_T(x)$is a predicate for$\vdash _{\leq h}$inT. It is shown that…Read more