Constructive proof
Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The middle that is not excluded
Either it is raining or it is not. Drop that as an axiom and what is left is still a logic — one with models made of open sets and of stages of knowledge, in which a set and its negation between them miss the boundary.
Nobody has a reason to run away
A matching is stable when no two people on opposite sides would both rather have each other than what they have — a condition that names nothing to build and everything to rule out. The surprise is that something always satisfies it, however perverse the rankings are made.
A proof that says which half
Classical logic proves p ∨ ¬p without any idea which half is true. The constructive system never does that: whenever it proves a disjunction, it proves one of the two halves. The reason is a picture — two countermodels placed side by side above a new first stage that forces neither — and the logics between the two lose the property exactly when their pictures are not allowed to be glued.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Excluded middleHeyting algebraIntuitionistic logicKripke modelBijectionBlocking pairCounterexampleDeferred acceptanceDisjunction propertyDouble negationExhaustive searchExistence proof