Almost a decade ago, Girard invented linear logic with the notion of a proof-net. Proof-nets are special graphs built from formulas, links and boxes. However, not all nets are proof-nets. First, they must be well constructed (we say that such graphs are proof-structures). Second, a proof-net is proof-structure that corresponds to a sequential proof. It must satisfy a correctness criterion. One may wonder what this static criterion means for cut-elimination. We prove that every incorrect proof-structure (without cut) can be put in an environment where reductions lead to two kinds of basically wrong configurations: deadlocks and disconnected proof-structures. Thus, this proof says that there does not exist a bigger class of proof-structures than proof-nets where normalization does not lead to obviously bad configurations.
展开▼
