Equivalency:
If
P
1
,
(
P
2
) are premiss(es) of any rule of GL,
C
is its conclusion,then
v
∗
(
P
1
) =
v
∗
(
C
) in case of one premiss rule and
v
∗
(
P
1
)
∩
v
∗
(
P
2
) =
v
∗
(
C
),in case of the two premisses rule.Some additional classical equivalencies used:((
A
∩
B
)
⇒
C
)
≡
(
A
⇒
(
¬
B
∪
C
))((
A
⇒
B
)
∩
(
A
⇒
C
))
≡
(
A
⇒
(
B
∩
C
))((
A
⇒
C
)
∩
(
B
⇒
C
))
≡
((
A
∪
B
)
⇒
C
)(
A
⇒
(
B
∪
C
))
≡
((
A
⇒
B
)
∪
C
)
Proof
: ((
A
∩
B
)
⇒
C
)
≡
(
¬¬
((
A
∩
B
)
⇒
C
))
≡
(
¬
((
A
∩
B
)
∩¬
C
))
≡
(
¬
(
A
∩
(
B
∩¬
C
)))
≡
(
¬
(
A
着
(
B
∩¬
C
)))
≡
(
A
⇒ ¬
(
B
∩¬
C
))
≡
(
A
⇒ ¬
(
B
∩¬
C
))
≡
(
A
⇒
(
¬
B
∪¬¬
C
))
≡
(
A
⇒
(
¬
B
∪
C
))((
A
⇒
B
)
∩
(
A
⇒
C
))
𠪪
((
A
⇒
B
)
∩
(
A
⇒
C
))
≡ ¬
(
¬
(
A
⇒
B
)
∪¬
(
A
⇒
C
))
≡ ¬
((
A
∩¬
B
)
∪
(
A
∩¬
C
))
≡ ¬
(
A
∩
(
¬
B
∪¬
C
)))
≡
(
A
⇒ ¬
(
¬
B
∪¬
C
))
≡
(
A
⇒
(
B
∩
C
))((
A
⇒
C
)
∩
(
B
⇒
C
))
𠪪
((
A
⇒
C
)
∩
(
B
⇒
C
))
≡ ¬
(
¬
(
A
⇒
C
)
∪¬
(
B
⇒
C
))
≡ ¬
((
A
∩¬
C
)
∪
(
B
∩¬
C
))
≡ ¬
((
A
∩¬
C
)
∪
(
B
∩¬
C
))
≡ ¬
((
¬
C
∩
A
)
∪
(
¬
C
∩
B
))
≡ ¬
(
¬
C
∩
(
A
∪
B
))
≡ ¬
((
A
∪
B
)
∩¬
C
)
≡
((
A
∪
B
)
⇒
C
)(
A
⇒
(
B
∪
C
))
𠪪
(
A
⇒
(
B
∪
C
))
≡ ¬
(
A
∩¬
(
B
∪
C
))
≡ ¬
(
A
∩
(
¬
B
∩¬
C
))1