English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It has been argued that reduction procedures are closely connected to thequestion about identity of proofs and that accepting certain reductions wouldlead to a trivialization of identity of proofs in the sense that everyderivation of the same conclusion would have to be identified. In this paper itwill be shown that the question, which reductions we accept in our system, isnot only important if we see them as generating a theory of proof identity butis also decisive for the more general question whether a proof has meaningfulcontent. There are certain reductions which would not only force us to identifyproofs of different arbitrary formulas but which would render derivations in asystem allowing them meaningless. To exclude such cases, a minimal criterion isproposed which reductions have to fulfill to be acceptable.

What are acceptable reductions? Perspectives from proof-theoretic semantics and type theory