author paulson Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:07:13 +0100 changeset 19152 d81fae81f385 parent 19151 66e841b1001e child 19153 0864119a9611
typos
 doc-src/Logics/LK.tex file | annotate | diff | comparison | revisions
--- a/doc-src/Logics/LK.tex	Mon Feb 27 17:37:37 2006 +0100
+++ b/doc-src/Logics/LK.tex	Tue Feb 28 11:07:13 2006 +0100
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
isabelle Sequents
context LK.thy;
\end{ttbox}
-Model logic and linear logic are also available, but unfortunately they are
+Modal logic and linear logic are also available, but unfortunately they are
not documented.

@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@
According to the cut-elimination theorem, the cut rule can be eliminated
from proofs of sequents.  But the rule is still essential.  It can be used
to structure a proof into lemmas, avoiding repeated proofs of the same
-formula.  More importantly, the cut rule can not be eliminated from
+formula.  More importantly, the cut rule cannot be eliminated from
derivations of rules.  For example, there is a trivial cut-free proof of
the sequent $$P\conj Q\turn Q\conj P$$.
Noting this, we might want to derive a rule for swapping the conjuncts