Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with logical-frameworks
Search options questions only
not deleted
user 428
Use this tag for proof assistants that are intended to be used to define logics or deductive systems in them.
13
votes
1
answer
179
views
Attempts to accommodate theories of different consistency strength in single assistant
TL;DR: How / where to formalize results concerning the logical strength of systems? Are proof assistants having a weak base theory but also enough infrastructure to make it feasible?
I'll start by gi …
- 11.1k