(i) By Corollary 1.3 (a) on P. 88, we know that the predicate. Q(x, y, z) S 1 (x, (z) 1, y, (z) 2 )
|
|
- Edwina Morrison
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 COMPUTABILITY: ANSWERS TO SOME EXERCISES IN CHAPTER 5 AND , P This exercise is important for several reasons. For example, it tells us that taking inverses is an effect operation; see Example on P. 94. It also supplies a piece of crucial information in the solution to Exercise and 7 on P (i) By Corollary 1.3 (a) on P. 88, we know that the predicate S 1 (x, z, y, t) P x (z) y in t or fewer steps is decidable. Thus the predicate y E x is equivalent to z t S 1 (x, z, y, t), which is equivalent to z S 1 (x, (z) 1, y, (z) 2 ). We can easily check that Q(x, y, z) S 1 (x, (z) 1, y, (z) 2 ) satisfies both conditions (a) and (b). (ii) Since the predicate Q(x, y, z) given in part (i) is decidable, the function g(x, y) = U(µz Q(x, y, z)) is computable, where U is defined by U(z) = (z) 1. In view of (i) (a) above, when y E x, the predicate z Q(x, y, z) fails and hence g(x, y) is undefined. On the other hand, suppose we have y E x. Then it makes sense to talk about the smallest z for which Q(x, y, z) holds, say z 0 = µz Q(x, y, z). Thus g(x, y) is defined and its value is given by g(x, y) = U(z 0 ). Certainly Q(x, y, z 0 ) holds. Thus, by (i) (b) we have φ x (g(x, y)) = φ x (U(z 0 )) = φ x ((z 0 ) 1 ) = y. (iii) Since f is computable, we have f = φ n for some n. The function g(n, y) (where g is the function described in part (ii) above) is computable. Also, φ n (g(n, y)) = y for all y E n and g(n, y) is undefined for y E n, where E n is the range of φ n f. Thus f 1 (y) = g(n, y), which is computable. 2. Since f and g are computable, φ m = f and φ n = g for some m and n. We have T 1 (m, x, z) S 1 (m, x, (z) 1, (z) 2 ) P m (x) (z) 1 in (z) 2 or fewer steps. 1
2 (Notice that, if the predicate T 1 (m, x.z) holds, then (z) 1 must be f(x). But this does not concern us here.) The predicate T 1 (n, x, z) is similarly defined. Since both T 1 (m, x, z) and T 1 (n, x, z) are decidable, so is T 1 (m, x, z) or T 1 (n, x, z). Hence Φ(x) = U(µz T 1 (m, x, z) or T 1 (n, x, z) ) is computable. Notice that the domain of Φ is W m W n. (When x W m W n, the value of Φ(x) is either f(x) φ m (x) or g(x) = φ n (x), depending on which computation, P m (x) or P n (x), finishes first. From the identity h(x) = 1(Φ(x)) it follows that h is computable , P Notice that c M = 1 c M. So it is natural to consider the compuatable function f(x, y) = 1 ψ U (x, y). By the s-m-n theorem we know that there is a total computable function k such that f(x, y) = ψ k(x) (y). In case φ e = c M, we have c M (y) = 1 c M (y) = 1 φ e (y) = 1 ψ U (e, y) = f(e, y) = φ k(e) (y). Thus φ k(e) = c M. Done. 2. Since ψ U is computable, the function f(x, y) = 1(ψ U (x, y))y (= 1(φ x (y))y) is also computable. Explicitly, { y if y Wx ; f x (y) f(x, y) = undefined otherwise with Dom(f x ) = Range(f x ) = W x. The s-m-n theorem tells us that there exists some total computable function k such that φ k(x) = f x. Thus E k(x) = Range(φ k(x) ) = Range(f x ) = W x. 3. From Example on P. 93 we know that there is a total cumputable function r(x, y) such that W x W y = W r(x,y). The previous exercise tells us that there is a total computable k(x) such that E k(x) = W x. If we can find a total computable function h(x) such that W h(x) = E x, then we will get E x E y = W h(x) W h(y) = W r(h(x),h(y)) = E k(r(h(x),h(y))) = W s(x,y), where s(x, y) = k r(h(x), h(y)) is computable. It remains to find such h. To do so, we need the help of Exercise (ii) on P. 90: there is a computable function 2
3 g(x, y) such that g(x, y) is defined iff y E x. By the s-m-n theorem, we know that there is a total computable function h such that g(x, y) = φ h(x) (y). Now y W h(x) φ h(x) (y) g(x, y) is defined y E x and hence W h(x) = E x. Done. 4. This is easy. Notice that y f 1 (W x ) means that f(y) W x, that is, φ x (f(y)) is defined. So it is only natural to consider the cumputable function h(x, y) = φ x (f(y)) ψ U (x, f(y)). Applying the s-m-n theorem, we can get a total computable function k such that φ k(x) (y) = h(x, y) = φ x (f(y)). Thus W k(x) = Dom(φ k(x) ) = Dom(φ x f) = f 1 (W x ). 5. (a) The main theorem in the present chapter, namely Theorem 1.2 on P. 86, tells us that the functions ψ (m) U (e, y 1,..., y m ) and ψ (n) (e k, z 1, z 2,... z n ) (1 k m) are computable. Hence the (partial) function F on N m+1 N n N m+1+n defined by F ((e,e 1,..., e m ), (z 1,..., z n )) = ψ (m) U (e, ψ(n) U Sub(φ (m) e (e 1, z 1,..., z n ),..., ψ (n) U (e m, z 1,..., z n )) ; φ (n) e 1,..., φ (n) e m )(z 1,..., z n ) is computable. Applying the s-m-n theorem to this function F, we get a total computable function s(e, e 1,..., e m ) such that Done. F ((e, e 1,..., e m ), (z 1,..., z n )) = φ s(e,e1,...,e m )(z 1,..., z n ). (b) We know that the function f(e, x) = µy (φ n+1 e (x, y) = 0) is computable and hence there is a total computable function k such that φ (n) k(e) (x) = f(e, x) , P First we pick out those parts for which we can apply Rice s Theorem and finish them quick. (d) Let B = {0}. (f) Let B = {f C 1 : f is total and constant}. (g) Let B = {f }. (h) Let B = {f C 1 : Range(f) is infinite}. (i) Let B = {g}. (In part (g) and part (i), B is a singleton set.) 3
4 (e) From Theorem 1.6 (b) on P. 104 we know that N(y) 0 E y is undecidable. Suppose the contrary that M(x, y) x E y is decidable. Then its characteristic function c M (x, y) is computable. Consequently c M (0, y) is computable. But c M (0, y) is just c N (y), the characteristic function of N(y). So this contradicts the fact that c N is not computable. (c) (This one is a bit tricky.) Suppose the contrary that M(x) φ x (x) = 0 is decidable. [ Notice that the opposite of M(x) is M(x) either x W x, or x W x but φ x (x) 0. ] Then its characteristic function c M is computable. Hence c M = φ n for some n. Since c M is a total function, so is φ n and hence W n = N. We check that both φ n (n) = 0 and φ n (n) 0 will lead to a contradiction. If φ n (n) = 0, then M holds for n and hence c M (n) = 1, contradicting φ n (n) = c M (n). If φ n (n) 0, then M fails for n and hence c M (n) = 0, again contradicting φ n (n) = c M (n). (b) Applying Rice s theorem to B = {f C 1 : f is total} we see that the predicate M(x) φ x is total is undecidable. Hence its characteristic function c M (x) is not computable. Take any computable function g which is total (e.g. g = 0) and let n be the integer such that φ n = g. Let h(x, y) be the characteristic function of the predicate W x = W y. Then f(x, n) is the characteristic function of W x = W n, or W x = N. Thus f(x, n) is just the characteristic function of the predicate M(x). So f(x, n) = c M (x) is not computable. Hence f(x, y) is not computable; (otherwise substituting y by n in f(x, y) would give us a computable function f(x, n)). Therefore W x = W y is undecidable. (a) First proof: use a diagonal argument. Suppose the contrary that x E x is decidable. Then the function { x if x Ex g(x) = undefined otherwise; is computable. Hence g = φ n for some n. Notice that Dom(g) = Range(g) = {x: x E x }. Suppose n Dom(g) = Dom(φ n ) = W n. Then n Range(g) = Range(φ n ) = E n. On the other hand, n Dom(g) = {x: x E x } and hence n E n, a contradiction. Next suppose n Dom(g). Then n Range(g) = Range(φ n ) = E n. On the other hand, n Dom(g) = {x: x E x } and hence n E n, a contradiction again. 4
5 Second proof: use reduction. Let f and k be those functions in the proof of Theorem 1.6 on P Then W k(x) = E k(x) = N iff x W x and W k(x) = E k(x) = iff x W x, from which we deduce that k(x) E k(x) iff x W x. Since k is a total computable function and x W x is undecidable, we see that y E y is also undecidable. 2. Assume the contrary that such f exists. [Intuitively, using f we can solve the Halting problem does the computation P x (y) eventually stop or go on for ever as follows. If the computation P x (y) stops in f(x, y) or fewer steps then the answer to the Holting problem is yes and otherwise no. The point here is that there is no need to go beyond f(x, y) steps to find out the answer to P x (y)?. But converting this idea to a formal proof needs some technical knowledge to handle the situation.] Recall from Corollary on P. 88 that H(e, x, t) P e (x) in t or fewer steps is decidable. By our assumption on f, we know that H n (e, x, f(e, x)) P e (x). Notice that the characteristic function c M (e, x) of the predicate M(e, x) H n (e, x, f(e, x)) is just c Hn (e, x, f(e, x)). Since H n is decidable, c Hn (e, x, t) is computable. Hence c M (e, x) = c Hn (e, x, f(e, x)) is also computable and as a consequence the predicate M(e, x) is decidable. But M(e, x) P e (x), which is just the Halting problem. Thus we have arrived at a contradiction , P (a) E (n) x W (n) x y t H n (x, y, t), where H n (x, y, t) P (n) x (y) in t or fewer steps is knwon to be decidable. So by Corollary 6.6 on P. 115, it follows that the predicate E (n) x is partially decidable. (b) We know that M(z) z is a perfect square is decidable. So its partial characteristic function χ M (z) is computable. Hence f(x, y) = χ M (φ x (y)) is computable. 5
6 Observe that f(x, y) is just the partial characteristc function of φ x (y) is a perfect square. (c) This question is obsolete because Fermat s Last Theorem was proved in recent years by Andrew Wiles. (d) Let π = y 0. y 1 y 2 y 3 (= k=0 y k/10 k ) be the decimal expansion of π. Then the function f defined by f(k) = y k is computable (this was known at least two thousand years ago). Hence the following predicate, denoted by M(x, z), f(z) 7, f(z + 1) = f(z + 2) = = f(z + x) = 7 and f(z + x + 1) 7, is decidable. By Theorem 6.5 on P. 115, the predicate in question, which is equivalent to z M(x, z) is partially decidable. 2. Let G be a finitely presented group. Let A = {a 1,..., a m } be a finite set of generators and R = {r 1, r 2,..., r n } be a finite set of defining relations. More precisely, R is a finite subset of the free group F n generated by A and G = F n /N, where N is the normal subgroup generated by R. Let π : F n G be the quotient map. The word problem is, given a word w, decide whether π(w) = e (e is the unit element of G). Now π(w) = e if and only if we can apply finitely many operations on elements z in F n of the following types to render w to the empty word : 1. multiply z by some r in R, or r 1, on either side of z; 2. replace z by aza 1 or a 1 za for some a A. By introducing appropriate symbols for these operations (this is similar to symbols for instructions in URM) we can effectively enumerate all these operations. Using Gödel s numbers, following the same method of Chapter 5 we can effectively enumerate all finite sequences of such operations (this is similar to enumeration of all URM programs), say S x (x N). Each S x represents a sequence of operations converting any word w in F n into a new word denoted by S x (w); (unlike P x for computable functions φ x, S x (w) is always defined). Also, we can effectively enumerate all words with aphabets in A, say w x. The predicate M(x, y) S y (w x ) = is decidable. Hence π(w) = e y M(x, y) is partially decidable, in view of Theorem 6.5 on P Omitted. The idea is similar to the last exercise. 4. The partial characteristic functions χ M (x) and χ N (x) of M(x) and N(x) are computable. Putting P M and N we have χ P (x) = χ M (x)χ N (x), which is computable. 6
7 Hence M(x) and N(x) is partially decidable. The other part, showing that M(x) or N(x) is partially decidable, is more difficult. This part is essentially the same as is Exercise on P. 90. Just replace unary functions f and g by n-ary functions χ M (x) and χ N (x), and replace T 1 by T n. Then proceed in the same manner. Notice that, if M(x) x W x, then M(x) is partially decidable, but ǹot M(x) x W x is not partially decidable. 5. (a) The predicate N(x, y, z) y < z and M(x, y) is partially decidable. So, by Theorem 6.5 on P. 115, the predicate y < z N(x, y, z) y (y < z and M(x, y) is also partially decidable. (b) Let f(x, y) be the partial characteristic function of M(x, y). Since M(x, y) is partially decidable, f(x, y) is computable. By Theorem on P. 38, we know that the function F (x, z) = Π y<z f(x, y) is computable. Since F (x, z) is nothing but the partial characteristic function of the predicate y < z M(x, y), hence the last predicate is computable. (c) We know that the predicate x W x is not partially decidable. But we have x W x y (x y and y W x ) where the predicate x y and y W x is partially decidable, because x y is decidable, while y W x (x, y) Dom(ψ U ) is partially decidable. 6. (a) Indeed, x is even y (x 2y = 0). (b) Indeed, x divies y z (zx y = 0). 7. (a) Another way to say x W x iff M(k(x)) does not hold is x W x iff M(k(x)) holds. Hence the predicate x K x, which is known to be not partially decidable, is reducible to M(x). Hence M(x) is not partially decidable. (b) The computable function k constructed in the proof of Theorem 1.6 on P. 104 has the property that x W x iff φ k(x) is total. It follows from part (a) above that the opposite of φ x is total is not partially decidable. 7
8 (c) Since the predicate P x (x) does not converge in y or fewer steps is decidable, the function f(x, y) is computable. Put f x (y) = f(x, y). Then it is clear that f x is total if and only if x W x. By the s-m-n theorem we know that there is a total computable function s such that f(x, y) = φ s(x) (y). Thus we have: x W x iff φ s(x) is total. As we know, the predicate x / W x is not partially decidable. Therefore φ x is total is also not partially decidable. 8. Assume that the predicate f(x) = y is partially decidable. By Theorem 6.4 on P. 114, we get a decidable predicate R(x, y, z) such that f(x) = y z R(x, y, z). We can check that f(x) = U(µz R(x, (z) 1, (z 2 )), where U(w) = (w) 1. Hence f is computable. 9. As usual, denote by χ M (x 1,..., x n ) and χ N (y) the partial characteristic functions of M(x 1,..., x n ) and N(y) respectively. Then we can check that χ N (y) = χ M (g 1 (y),..., g n (y)), which is computable. From C.K. Fong; August 2,
Elementary Recursive Function Theory
Chapter 9 Elementary Recursive Function Theory 9.1 Acceptable Indexings In a previous Section, we have exhibited a specific indexing of the partial computable functions by encoding the RAM programs. Using
More informationbe any ring homomorphism and let s S be any element of S. Then there is a unique ring homomorphism
21. Polynomial rings Let us now turn out attention to determining the prime elements of a polynomial ring, where the coefficient ring is a field. We already know that such a polynomial ring is a UFD. Therefore
More informationFirst-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms
First-Order Logic 1 Syntax Domain of Discourse The domain of discourse for first order logic is FO structures or models. A FO structure contains Relations Functions Constants (functions of arity 0) FO
More informationELEMENTS IN MATHEMATICS FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE NO.6 TURING MACHINE AND COMPUTABILITY. Tatsuya Hagino
1 ELEMENTS IN MATHEMATICS FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE NO.6 TURING MACHINE AND COMPUTABILITY Tatsuya Hagino hagino@sfc.keio.ac.jp 2 So far Computation flow chart program while program recursive function primitive
More information+ 1 3 x2 2x x3 + 3x 2 + 0x x x2 2x + 3 4
Math 4030-001/Foundations of Algebra/Fall 2017 Polynomials at the Foundations: Rational Coefficients The rational numbers are our first field, meaning that all the laws of arithmetic hold, every number
More information8. Limit Laws. lim(f g)(x) = lim f(x) lim g(x), (x) = lim x a f(x) g lim x a g(x)
8. Limit Laws 8.1. Basic Limit Laws. If f and g are two functions and we know the it of each of them at a given point a, then we can easily compute the it at a of their sum, difference, product, constant
More informationNotes on ordinals and cardinals
Notes on ordinals and cardinals Reed Solomon 1 Background Terminology We will use the following notation for the common number systems: N = {0, 1, 2,...} = the natural numbers Z = {..., 2, 1, 0, 1, 2,...}
More informationDiscrete Mathematics for CS Spring 2007 Luca Trevisan Lecture 27
CS 70 Discrete Mathematics for CS Spring 007 Luca Trevisan Lecture 7 Infinity and Countability Consider a function f that maps elements of a set A (called the domain of f ) to elements of set B (called
More information2 Computable and Computably Enumerable Sets
Notes For CMSC 650- COMPUTABILITY by A.Amir and W.I. Gasarch 1 Introduction We take our model of computation to be Java Programs. Traditionally one defines Turing Machines and we will use that terminology,
More informationwhere c R and the content of f is one. 1
9. Gauss Lemma Obviously it would be nice to have some more general methods of proving that a given polynomial is irreducible. The first is rather beautiful and due to Gauss. The basic idea is as follows.
More information(a) Definition of TMs. First Problem of URMs
Sec. 4: Turing Machines First Problem of URMs (a) Definition of the Turing Machine. (b) URM computable functions are Turing computable. (c) Undecidability of the Turing Halting Problem That incrementing
More informationCHAPTER 2. FIRST ORDER LOGIC
CHAPTER 2. FIRST ORDER LOGIC 1. Introduction First order logic is a much richer system than sentential logic. Its interpretations include the usual structures of mathematics, and its sentences enable us
More informationArithmetic and Incompleteness. Will Gunther. Goals. Coding with Naturals. Logic and Incompleteness. Will Gunther. February 6, 2013
Logic February 6, 2013 Logic 1 2 3 Logic About Talk Logic Things talk Will approach from angle of computation. Will not assume very much knowledge. Will prove Gödel s Incompleteness Theorem. Will not talk
More informationPeano Arithmetic. CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook) Fall, Goals Now
CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook) Fall, 2008 Peano Arithmetic Goals Now 1) We will introduce a standard set of axioms for the language L A. The theory generated by these axioms is denoted PA and called Peano
More informationSolution. 1 Solutions of Homework 1. 2 Homework 2. Sangchul Lee. February 19, Problem 1.2
Solution Sangchul Lee February 19, 2018 1 Solutions of Homework 1 Problem 1.2 Let A and B be nonempty subsets of R + :: {x R : x > 0} which are bounded above. Let us define C = {xy : x A and y B} Show
More informationComputability. Part II. 6 Models of Computation. Register Machines
Part II Computability 6 Models of Computation What is a computable function? Our modern intuition is that a function f : N N is computable if there is a a program in a computer language like C ++, PASCAL
More informationLet f(x) = x, but the domain of f is the interval 0 x 1. Note
I.g Maximum and Minimum. Lagrange Multipliers Recall: Suppose we are given y = f(x). We recall that the maximum/minimum points occur at the following points: (1) where f = 0; (2) where f does not exist;
More informationCS154, Lecture 10: Rice s Theorem, Oracle Machines
CS154, Lecture 10: Rice s Theorem, Oracle Machines Moral: Analyzing Programs is Really, Really Hard But can we more easily tell when some program analysis problem is undecidable? Problem 1 Undecidable
More informationUndecidability of the validity problem
Undecidability of the validity problem We prove the undecidability of the validity problem for formulas of predicate logic with equality. Recall: there is an algorithm that given a formula of predicate
More informationThe cardinal comparison of sets
(B) The cardinal comparison of sets I think we can agree that there is some kind of fundamental difference between finite sets and infinite sets. For a finite set we can count its members and so give it
More informationSection Properties of Rational Expressions
88 Section. - Properties of Rational Expressions Recall that a rational number is any number that can be written as the ratio of two integers where the integer in the denominator cannot be. Rational Numbers:
More informationCSCI3390-Lecture 6: An Undecidable Problem
CSCI3390-Lecture 6: An Undecidable Problem September 21, 2018 1 Summary The language L T M recognized by the universal Turing machine is not decidable. Thus there is no algorithm that determines, yes or
More information16.1 Countability. CS125 Lecture 16 Fall 2014
CS125 Lecture 16 Fall 2014 16.1 Countability Proving the non-existence of algorithms for computational problems can be very difficult. Indeed, we do not know how to prove P NP. So a natural question is
More informationComputability. Part II. 6 Models of Computation. Register Machines
Part II Computability 6 Models of Computation What is a computable function? Our modern intuition is that a function f : N N is computable if there is a a program in a computer language like C ++, PASCAL
More informationMetric Spaces and Topology
Chapter 2 Metric Spaces and Topology From an engineering perspective, the most important way to construct a topology on a set is to define the topology in terms of a metric on the set. This approach underlies
More informationCOMP 409: Logic Homework 5
COMP 409: Logic Homework 5 Note: The pages below refer to the text from the book by Enderton. 1. Exercises 1-6 on p. 78. 1. Translate into this language the English sentences listed below. If the English
More informationDefinition: Let S and T be sets. A binary relation on SxT is any subset of SxT. A binary relation on S is any subset of SxS.
4 Functions Before studying functions we will first quickly define a more general idea, namely the notion of a relation. A function turns out to be a special type of relation. Definition: Let S and T be
More informationMeta-logic derivation rules
Meta-logic derivation rules Hans Halvorson February 19, 2013 Recall that the goal of this course is to learn how to prove things about (as opposed to by means of ) classical first-order logic. So, we will
More informationLet us first solve the midterm problem 4 before we bring up the related issues.
Math 310 Class Notes 6: Countability Let us first solve the midterm problem 4 before we bring up the related issues. Theorem 1. Let I n := {k N : k n}. Let f : I n N be a one-toone function and let Im(f)
More information5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting
5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting Let N denote the positive integers, N 0 := N {0} be the non-negative integers and Z = N 0 ( N) the positive and negative integers including 0, Q the rational numbers,
More informationFunctions. Chapter Continuous Functions
Chapter 3 Functions 3.1 Continuous Functions A function f is determined by the domain of f: dom(f) R, the set on which f is defined, and the rule specifying the value f(x) of f at each x dom(f). If f is
More informationThe Turing Machine. Computability. The Church-Turing Thesis (1936) Theory Hall of Fame. Theory Hall of Fame. Undecidability
The Turing Machine Computability Motivating idea Build a theoretical a human computer Likened to a human with a paper and pencil that can solve problems in an algorithmic way The theoretical provides a
More information( 3) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
81 Instruction: Determining the Possible Rational Roots using the Rational Root Theorem Consider the theorem stated below. Rational Root Theorem: If the rational number b / c, in lowest terms, is a root
More informationSolutions to odd-numbered exercises Peter J. Cameron, Introduction to Algebra, Chapter 2
Solutions to odd-numbered exercises Peter J Cameron, Introduction to Algebra, Chapter 1 The answers are a No; b No; c Yes; d Yes; e No; f Yes; g Yes; h No; i Yes; j No a No: The inverse law for addition
More informationCHAPTER 5. Interactive Turing Machines
CHAPTER 5 Interactive Turing Machines The interactive Turing machine, which was introduced by Van Leeuwen and Wiedermann[28, 30], is an extension of the classical Turing machine model. It attempts to model
More informationAxiomatic set theory. Chapter Why axiomatic set theory?
Chapter 1 Axiomatic set theory 1.1 Why axiomatic set theory? Essentially all mathematical theories deal with sets in one way or another. In most cases, however, the use of set theory is limited to its
More informationCS 125 Section #10 (Un)decidability and Probability November 1, 2016
CS 125 Section #10 (Un)decidability and Probability November 1, 2016 1 Countability Recall that a set S is countable (either finite or countably infinite) if and only if there exists a surjective mapping
More informationGödel s Incompleteness Theorem
Gödel s Incompleteness Theorem There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are proved in your philosophy. (W.Shakespeare, with changes by me) Prologue Cretans, ever liars, wretched creatures,
More informationCSE355 SUMMER 2018 LECTURES TURING MACHINES AND (UN)DECIDABILITY
CSE355 SUMMER 2018 LECTURES TURING MACHINES AND (UN)DECIDABILITY RYAN DOUGHERTY If we want to talk about a program running on a real computer, consider the following: when a program reads an instruction,
More informationDR.RUPNATHJI( DR.RUPAK NATH )
Contents 1 Sets 1 2 The Real Numbers 9 3 Sequences 29 4 Series 59 5 Functions 81 6 Power Series 105 7 The elementary functions 111 Chapter 1 Sets It is very convenient to introduce some notation and terminology
More informationMath 261 Exercise sheet 5
Math 261 Exercise sheet 5 http://staff.aub.edu.lb/~nm116/teaching/2018/math261/index.html Version: October 24, 2018 Answers are due for Wednesday 24 October, 11AM. The use of calculators is allowed. Exercise
More informationDecision Problems with TM s. Lecture 31: Halting Problem. Universe of discourse. Semi-decidable. Look at following sets: CSCI 81 Spring, 2012
Decision Problems with TM s Look at following sets: Lecture 31: Halting Problem CSCI 81 Spring, 2012 Kim Bruce A TM = { M,w M is a TM and w L(M)} H TM = { M,w M is a TM which halts on input w} TOTAL TM
More informationCourse 311: Michaelmas Term 2005 Part III: Topics in Commutative Algebra
Course 311: Michaelmas Term 2005 Part III: Topics in Commutative Algebra D. R. Wilkins Contents 3 Topics in Commutative Algebra 2 3.1 Rings and Fields......................... 2 3.2 Ideals...............................
More informationExample: This theorem is the easiest way to test an ideal (or an element) is prime. Z[x] (x)
Math 4010/5530 Factorization Theory January 2016 Let R be an integral domain. Recall that s, t R are called associates if they differ by a unit (i.e. there is some c R such that s = ct). Let R be a commutative
More informationTheorem 5.3. Let E/F, E = F (u), be a simple field extension. Then u is algebraic if and only if E/F is finite. In this case, [E : F ] = deg f u.
5. Fields 5.1. Field extensions. Let F E be a subfield of the field E. We also describe this situation by saying that E is an extension field of F, and we write E/F to express this fact. If E/F is a field
More informationPrimitive recursive functions: decidability problems
Primitive recursive functions: decidability problems Armando B. Matos October 24, 2014 Abstract Although every primitive recursive (PR) function is total, many problems related to PR functions are undecidable.
More informationProofs. Chapter 2 P P Q Q
Chapter Proofs In this chapter we develop three methods for proving a statement. To start let s suppose the statement is of the form P Q or if P, then Q. Direct: This method typically starts with P. Then,
More informationMathematical Logic (IX)
Mathematical Logic (IX) Yijia Chen 1. The Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem and the Compactness Theorem Using the term-interpretation, it is routine to verify: Theorem 1.1 (Löwenheim-Skolem). Let Φ L S be at most
More informationProjective space. There are some situations when this approach seems to break down; for example with an equation like f(x; y) =y 2 (x 3 5x +3) the lin
Math 445 Handy facts since the second exam Don't forget the handy facts from the first two exams! Rational points on curves For more general curves, defined by polynomials f(x; y) = 0 of higher degree,
More informationInformal Statement Calculus
FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS Branches of Logic 1. Theory of Computations (i.e. Recursion Theory). 2. Proof Theory. 3. Model Theory. 4. Set Theory. Informal Statement Calculus STATEMENTS AND CONNECTIVES Example
More information0.1 The Iteration Theorem of Kleene
1 March 19 01 The Iteration Theorem of Kleene Suppose that i codes a URM program, M, that acts on input variables x and y to compute a function λxyf(x, y) It is certainly trivial to modify program M to
More information2.2 Lowenheim-Skolem-Tarski theorems
Logic SEP: Day 1 July 15, 2013 1 Some references Syllabus: http://www.math.wisc.edu/graduate/guide-qe Previous years qualifying exams: http://www.math.wisc.edu/ miller/old/qual/index.html Miller s Moore
More informationADVANCED CALCULUS - MTH433 LECTURE 4 - FINITE AND INFINITE SETS
ADVANCED CALCULUS - MTH433 LECTURE 4 - FINITE AND INFINITE SETS 1. Cardinal number of a set The cardinal number (or simply cardinal) of a set is a generalization of the concept of the number of elements
More informationALGEBRA. 1. Some elementary number theory 1.1. Primes and divisibility. We denote the collection of integers
ALGEBRA CHRISTIAN REMLING 1. Some elementary number theory 1.1. Primes and divisibility. We denote the collection of integers by Z = {..., 2, 1, 0, 1,...}. Given a, b Z, we write a b if b = ac for some
More informationClassical First-Order Logic
Classical First-Order Logic Software Formal Verification Maria João Frade Departmento de Informática Universidade do Minho 2008/2009 Maria João Frade (DI-UM) First-Order Logic (Classical) MFES 2008/09
More informationIntroduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006
Introduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006 Ulle Endriss Institute for Logic, Language and Computation University of Amsterdam Ulle Endriss 1 Plan for Today Today s class will be an introduction
More information23.1 Gödel Numberings and Diagonalization
Applied Logic Lecture 23: Unsolvable Problems in Logic CS 4860 Spring 2009 Tuesday, April 14, 2009 The fact that Peano Arithmetic is expressive enough to represent all computable functions means that some
More informationLecture Notes on DISCRETE MATHEMATICS. Eusebius Doedel
Lecture Notes on DISCRETE MATHEMATICS Eusebius Doedel c Eusebius J. Doedel, 009 Contents Logic. Introduction............................................................................... Basic logical
More informationDepartment of Computer Science University at Albany, State University of New York Solutions to Sample Discrete Mathematics Examination II (Fall 2007)
Department of Computer Science University at Albany, State University of New York Solutions to Sample Discrete Mathematics Examination II (Fall 2007) Problem 1: Specify two different predicates P (x) and
More informationCountability. 1 Motivation. 2 Counting
Countability 1 Motivation In topology as well as other areas of mathematics, we deal with a lot of infinite sets. However, as we will gradually discover, some infinite sets are bigger than others. Countably
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTABILITY THEORY
AN INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTABILITY THEORY CINDY CHUNG Abstract. This paper will give an introduction to the fundamentals of computability theory. Based on Robert Soare s textbook, The Art of Turing Computability:
More informationHerbrand Theorem, Equality, and Compactness
CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook and T. Pitassi) Fall, 2014 Herbrand Theorem, Equality, and Compactness The Herbrand Theorem We now consider a complete method for proving the unsatisfiability of sets of first-order
More information1 Showing Recognizability
CSCC63 Worksheet Recognizability and Decidability 1 1 Showing Recognizability 1.1 An Example - take 1 Let Σ be an alphabet. L = { M M is a T M and L(M) }, i.e., that M accepts some string from Σ. Prove
More informationAbstract Algebra I. Randall R. Holmes Auburn University. Copyright c 2012 by Randall R. Holmes Last revision: November 11, 2016
Abstract Algebra I Randall R. Holmes Auburn University Copyright c 2012 by Randall R. Holmes Last revision: November 11, 2016 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
More informationComputational Models Lecture 8 1
Computational Models Lecture 8 1 Handout Mode Nachum Dershowitz & Yishay Mansour. Tel Aviv University. May 17 22, 2017 1 Based on frames by Benny Chor, Tel Aviv University, modifying frames by Maurice
More informationLocal properties of plane algebraic curves
Chapter 7 Local properties of plane algebraic curves Throughout this chapter let K be an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, and as usual let A (K) be embedded into P (K) by identifying
More informationMathematics-I Prof. S.K. Ray Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. Lecture 1 Real Numbers
Mathematics-I Prof. S.K. Ray Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur Lecture 1 Real Numbers In these lectures, we are going to study a branch of mathematics called
More informationCONSTRUCTION OF THE REAL NUMBERS.
CONSTRUCTION OF THE REAL NUMBERS. IAN KIMING 1. Motivation. It will not come as a big surprise to anyone when I say that we need the real numbers in mathematics. More to the point, we need to be able to
More informationMath 115 Spring 11 Written Homework 10 Solutions
Math 5 Spring Written Homework 0 Solutions. For following its, state what indeterminate form the its are in and evaluate the its. (a) 3x 4x 4 x x 8 Solution: This is in indeterminate form 0. Algebraically,
More informationShow Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Tables of tautologies and contradictions are on the last page.
Formal Methods Midterm 1, Spring, 2007 Name Show Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Tables of tautologies and contradictions are on the last page. 1. Use truth
More informationFORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY
15-453 FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY THURSDAY APRIL 3 REVIEW for Midterm TUESDAY April 8 Definition: A Turing Machine is a 7-tuple T = (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q, q accept, q reject ), where: Q is a
More informationCS5371 Theory of Computation. Lecture 14: Computability V (Prove by Reduction)
CS5371 Theory of Computation Lecture 14: Computability V (Prove by Reduction) Objectives This lecture shows more undecidable languages Our proof is not based on diagonalization Instead, we reduce the problem
More informationThe integers. Chapter 3
Chapter 3 The integers Recall that an abelian group is a set A with a special element 0, and operation + such that x +0=x x + y = y + x x +y + z) =x + y)+z every element x has an inverse x + y =0 We also
More informationLOGIC AND SET THEORY - HOMEWORK Question 1. n + 1 Unknown - either n or n 1, depending on whether { } A
LOGIC AND SET THEORY - HOMEWORK 1 OHAD LUTZKY, MAAYAN KESHET 1. Question 1 In the order A B, A B, A B =, Yes, no, yes No, yes, no Yes, no, yes Same as 1 Yes, no, yes No, yes, no 2. Question 2 n 0 n + 1
More information1. From Lewis Carroll: extract a pair of premises and finish the conclusion.
Math 2200 2. Treibergs σιι First Midterm Exam Name: Sample January 26, 2011 Sample First Midterm Questions. Sept. 17, 2008 and Sept. 16, 2009. Some questions from Math 3210 Midterms of 1. From Lewis Carroll:
More informationLecture 6: Finite Fields
CCS Discrete Math I Professor: Padraic Bartlett Lecture 6: Finite Fields Week 6 UCSB 2014 It ain t what they call you, it s what you answer to. W. C. Fields 1 Fields In the next two weeks, we re going
More informationHence, (f(x) f(x 0 )) 2 + (g(x) g(x 0 )) 2 < ɛ
Matthew Straughn Math 402 Homework 5 Homework 5 (p. 429) 13.3.5, 13.3.6 (p. 432) 13.4.1, 13.4.2, 13.4.7*, 13.4.9 (p. 448-449) 14.2.1, 14.2.2 Exercise 13.3.5. Let (X, d X ) be a metric space, and let f
More informationFirst-Order Logic (FOL)
First-Order Logic (FOL) Also called Predicate Logic or Predicate Calculus 2. First-Order Logic (FOL) FOL Syntax variables x, y, z, constants a, b, c, functions f, g, h, terms variables, constants or n-ary
More informationMATH 103 Pre-Calculus Mathematics Test #3 Fall 2008 Dr. McCloskey Sample Solutions
MATH 103 Pre-Calculus Mathematics Test #3 Fall 008 Dr. McCloskey Sample Solutions 1. Let P (x) = 3x 4 + x 3 x + and D(x) = x + x 1. Find polynomials Q(x) and R(x) such that P (x) = Q(x) D(x) + R(x). (That
More informationChapter 2 Algorithms and Computation
Chapter 2 Algorithms and Computation In this chapter, we first discuss the principles of algorithm and computation in general framework, common both in classical and quantum computers, then we go to the
More informationFinite and Infinite Sets
Chapter 9 Finite and Infinite Sets 9. Finite Sets Preview Activity (Equivalent Sets, Part ). Let A and B be sets and let f be a function from A to B..f W A! B/. Carefully complete each of the following
More information2. Prime and Maximal Ideals
18 Andreas Gathmann 2. Prime and Maximal Ideals There are two special kinds of ideals that are of particular importance, both algebraically and geometrically: the so-called prime and maximal ideals. Let
More information5-8 Study Guide and Intervention
Study Guide and Intervention Identify Rational Zeros Rational Zero Theorem Corollary (Integral Zero Theorem) Let f(x) = a n x n + a n - 1 x n - 1 + + a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 represent a polynomial function
More informationMT804 Analysis Homework II
MT804 Analysis Homework II Eudoxus October 6, 2008 p. 135 4.5.1, 4.5.2 p. 136 4.5.3 part a only) p. 140 4.6.1 Exercise 4.5.1 Use the Intermediate Value Theorem to prove that every polynomial of with real
More informationSets, Structures, Numbers
Chapter 1 Sets, Structures, Numbers Abstract In this chapter we shall introduce most of the background needed to develop the foundations of mathematical analysis. We start with sets and algebraic structures.
More information258 Handbook of Discrete and Combinatorial Mathematics
258 Handbook of Discrete and Combinatorial Mathematics 16.3 COMPUTABILITY Most of the material presented here is presented in far more detail in the texts of Rogers [R], Odifreddi [O], and Soare [S]. In
More informationPredicate Calculus. Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson
Predicate Calculus Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson Outline 1. Motivation 1. Variables, quantifiers and predicates 2. Syntax 1. Terms and formulas 2. Quantifiers, scope
More informationComplexity Theory VU , SS The Polynomial Hierarchy. Reinhard Pichler
Complexity Theory Complexity Theory VU 181.142, SS 2018 6. The Polynomial Hierarchy Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität Wien 15 May, 2018 Reinhard
More informationOutline. Complexity Theory EXACT TSP. The Class DP. Definition. Problem EXACT TSP. Complexity of EXACT TSP. Proposition VU 181.
Complexity Theory Complexity Theory Outline Complexity Theory VU 181.142, SS 2018 6. The Polynomial Hierarchy Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität
More informationOn sets, functions and relations
On sets, functions and relations Rosalie Iemhoff November 23, 2007 1 Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Sets 4 2.1 Notation................................ 4 2.2 Careful................................. 6 2.3
More information3. Only sequences that were formed by using finitely many applications of rules 1 and 2, are propositional formulas.
1 Chapter 1 Propositional Logic Mathematical logic studies correct thinking, correct deductions of statements from other statements. Let us make it more precise. A fundamental property of a statement is
More informationResolution for Predicate Logic
Logic and Proof Hilary 2016 James Worrell Resolution for Predicate Logic A serious drawback of the ground resolution procedure is that it requires looking ahead to predict which ground instances of clauses
More informationTURING MAHINES
15-453 TURING MAHINES TURING MACHINE FINITE STATE q 10 CONTROL AI N P U T INFINITE TAPE read write move 0 0, R, R q accept, R q reject 0 0, R 0 0, R, L read write move 0 0, R, R q accept, R 0 0, R 0 0,
More informationComputational Group Theory
Computational Group Theory Soria Summer School 2009 Session 3: Coset enumeration July 2009, Hans Sterk (sterk@win.tue.nl) Where innovation starts Coset enumeration: contents 2/25 What is coset enumeration
More informationChapter 2: First Order DE 2.6 Exact DE and Integrating Fa
Chapter 2: First Order DE 2.6 Exact DE and Integrating Factor First Order DE Recall the general form of the First Order DEs (FODE): dy dx = f(x, y) (1) (In this section x is the independent variable; not
More informationPROGRAM S GRAMMARS ARGUMENTS. Joachim Lambek
1 PROGRAM S GRAMMARS ARGUMENTS Joachim Lambek 2 Contents 1 Calculations on an abacus 7 1.1 What is a calculation?............................. 7 1.2 Calculable functions.............................. 11
More informationxy xyy 1 = ey 1 = y 1 i.e.
Homework 2 solutions. Problem 4.4. Let g be an element of the group G. Keep g fixed and let x vary through G. Prove that the products gx are all distinct and fill out G. Do the same for the products xg.
More informationComputable Functions
Computable Functions Part I: Non Computable Functions Computable and Partially Computable Functions Computable Function Exists a Turing Machine M -- M Halts on All Input -- M(x) = f (x) Partially Computable
More information4. We accept without proofs that the following functions are differentiable: (e x ) = e x, sin x = cos x, cos x = sin x, log (x) = 1 sin x
4 We accept without proofs that the following functions are differentiable: (e x ) = e x, sin x = cos x, cos x = sin x, log (x) = 1 sin x x, x > 0 Since tan x = cos x, from the quotient rule, tan x = sin
More informationON COMPUTAMBLE NUMBERS, WITH AN APPLICATION TO THE ENTSCHENIDUGSPROBLEM. Turing 1936
ON COMPUTAMBLE NUMBERS, WITH AN APPLICATION TO THE ENTSCHENIDUGSPROBLEM Turing 1936 Where are We? Ignoramus et ignorabimus Wir mussen wissen Wir werden wissen We do not know We shall not know We must know
More information