Existence and Consistency in Bounded Arithmetic
|
|
- Ada Jocelin Gordon
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Existence and Consistency in Bounded Arithmetic Yoriyuki Yamagata National Institute of Advanced Science and Technology (AIST) Kusatsu, August 30, 2011
2 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
3 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
4 Self introduction - Data Name Yoriyuki Yamagata title Researcher Web page Personal web page yoriyuki.yamagaga@aist.go.jp Twitter yoriyuki
5 Self introduction - History 2005 Researcher, AIST Verification of software update system Formal system for LCM 2004 Research staff, AIST Development of software update system 2002 PhD(Mathematical Science), University of Tokyo Computational Interpretation of classical logic
6 Self introduction - Publications 2008 A sequent calculus for limit computable mathematics (with Stefano Berardi, APAL) 2004 Strong normalization of second-order symmetric lambda-mu calculus (Information and Computation) 2002 Strong normalization of a symmetric lambda calculus for second-order classical logic (AML) 2001 Strong normalization of second-order symmetric lambda-mu calculus (TACS2001)
7 Self introduction - Software Camomile an open source Unicode library for OCaml programming language. Shinji/Mana an HMM-based open-source kana-kanji conversion engine. HatenaTail a web site which gives recommended web pages to the users based on their Hatena Bookmark histories.
8 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
9 Summary - Results Defined EA such that S 2 2 Con EA S 1 2 Con EA EA p( n ) Con EA (n) where EA quantifier-free arithmetic with free logic, without induction Con EA consistency of tree-like EA -proof Con EA (n) consistency of tree-like EA -proofs which are smaller than n (as Gödel numbers) p(x) a polynomial bound of the size of dag-like proof of Con EA (n).
10 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
11 Ramified recurrence Let N 0, N 1 be two copies of N. f : N i0 N in N j is a ramified primitive recursive function if either 1. f is a constant 0 or projection 2. f is obtained from ramified primitive recursive functions by composition 3. f is defined by ramified recurrence f (0, a) = g(a) f (s 0 a, a) = h 0 (a, f (a, a), a) f (s 1 a, a) = h 1 (a, f (a, a), a) where j > i 0 or f (a, a) does not appear in h 0, h 1.
12 Ramified recurrence Fact (Leivant 1994) The class of ramified primitive recursive functions is exactly same to P. D : defining equations of polynomial-time functions using ramified recurrence.
13 Cook Urquhart s PV Axioms Equality rules
14 Cook Urquhart s PV Axioms Defining axioms for all polynomial-time functions
15 Cook Urquhart s PV Axioms Finite number of valid atomic rules A 1 A n A In particular, under the assumption of P = NP
16 Cook Urquhart s PV Axioms Finite number of valid atomic rules A 1 A n A In particular, under the assumption of P = NP f (a) t(a) A(f (a), a) A(b, a) where A(x, a) : NP-complete predicate
17 Cook Urquhart s PV Inference Propositional logic
18 Cook Urquhart s PV Inference Substitution rule. A(a) A(t) where a does not occur freely in the assumptions of A(a).
19 Cook Urquhart s PV Inference PIND A(0) [A( a 2 )]. A(a) A(t)
20 EA and EA - Language
21 EA and EA - Language Function symbols Function symbols for all polynomial-time functions
22 EA and EA - Language Function symbols Function symbols for all polynomial-time functions Predicate symbols E, =,
23 EA and EA - Language Function symbols Function symbols for all polynomial-time functions Predicate symbols E, =, Atomic formula t = u, t u
24 EA and EA - Language Function symbols Function symbols for all polynomial-time functions Predicate symbols E, =, Atomic formula t = u, t u E-form Et
25 EA and EA - Language Function symbols Function symbols for all polynomial-time functions Predicate symbols E, =, Atomic formula t = u, t u E-form Et Formula where a is an atomic formula. A ::= a a A A A A Et
26 EA and EA - Axioms E-axioms E0 Et Es j t j = 0, 1 Ef (t 1,..., t n ) Et j j = 1,..., n p(t 1, t 2 ) Ea j j = 1, 2; p {=, } p(t 1, t 2 ) Et j j = 1, 2; p {=, }
27 EA and EA - Axioms Equality axioms Et t = t t = s s = t t = s, s = r t = r t = s s i t = s i s i = 0, 1 Et(t), t = s t(t) = t(s) t 1 = s 1, t 2 = s 2, p(t 1, t 2 ) p(s 1, s 2 ) p {=, }
28 EA and EA - Axioms Defining equations For each f (p(a), a) = t D, we have as an axiom. Et f (p(a), a) = t
29 EA and EA - Axioms Auxiliary axioms For finite number of valid atomic rules we have A 1 A n A A 1 A n Et A as an axiom, where t are all terms which appear in A, A 1,..., A n.
30 EA and EA - inference -intro rule [A]. Et A where t are all terms which appear in A
31 EA and EA - inference excluded middle Et [ A]. A where t are all terms which appear in A
32 EA and EA - inference substitution. Et A(a) A(t)
33 EA and EA - inference data elimination [A(a)] [A(a)] Et A(0). A(s 0 a). A(s 1 a) A(t) EA is a system which have the full data elimination rule.
34 EA and EA - inference degenerated data elimination Et A(0). A(s 0 a). A(s 1 a) A(t) in there is no assumption on A(a). EA is a system which only have the degenerated data elimination rule.
35 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
36 Valuation and truth - Notation e t Code of function a t(a) {e}(u, a) Result of running code e with input a until u clock. If the program is not terminated, it returns undefined Environment ρ Finite map from variables to integer.
37 Valuation and truth - Definition bounded valuation of term t val( t, u, ρ) := {e t }(u, ρ(a)) Convergence of term t val( t, u, ρ) def val( t, u, ρ(a)) undefined
38 Valuation and truth - Definition Existence T ( Et, u, ρ) def val( t, u, ρ(a)) Equality T ( t 1 = t 2, u, ρ) def val( t 1, u, ρ(a)) val( t 2, u, ρ(a)) val( t 1, u, ρ(a)) = val( t 2, u, ρ(a))
39 Valuation and truth - Definition Existence T ( Et, u, ρ) def val( t, u, ρ(a)) Inequality T ( t 1 t 2, u, ρ) def val( t 1, u, a) val( t 2, u, ρ(a)) val( t 1, u, ρ(a)) val( t 2, u, ρ(a))
40 Soundness of EA - Assumption u Upper bound π tree-like EA -proof π 1 sub-proof of π A 1,..., A n Occurrences of assumptions of π 1 A Conclusion of π 1 Integer assigned to assumption u j ρ Environment
41 Soundness of EA - Statement Proposition (Soundness of EA ) T ( A 1, u 1, ρ) T ( A n, u n, ρ) u 1 u n π 1 u T ( A, u 1 u n π 1, ρ)
42 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s
43 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s ũ := u 1 u n π 1 ũ 0 := u 1 u n π 0 C Constant (throughout this presentation)
44 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s
45 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ)
46 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ) 3. Similarly s 0 v s = val( s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ)
47 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ) 3. Similarly s 0 v s = val( s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 4. Then s 0 v t = s 0 v s
48 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ) 3. Similarly s 0 v s = val( s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 4. Then s 0 v t = s 0 v s 5. Hence T ( s 0 t = s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ)
49 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ) 3. Similarly s 0 v s = val( s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 4. Then s 0 v t = s 0 v s 5. Hence T ( s 0 t = s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 6. By suitable encoding, ũ 0 C ũ
50 Soundness of EA - Proof Axiom. π 0 t = s s 0 t = s 0 s 1. Since T ( t = s, ũ 0, ρ), v t = val( t, ũ 0, ρ), v s = val( s, ũ 0, ρ) and v t = v s 2. Therefore s 0 v t = val( s 0 t, ũ 0 C, ρ) 3. Similarly s 0 v s = val( s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 4. Then s 0 v t = s 0 v s 5. Hence T ( s 0 t = s 0 s, ũ 0 C, ρ) 6. By suitable encoding, ũ 0 C ũ 7. T ( s 0 t = s 0 s, ũ, ρ)
51 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a)
52 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1
53 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1 1. v t := val( t, ũ E π E, ρ)
54 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1 1. v t := val( t, ũ E π E, ρ) 2. Assume v t = s 0 v
55 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1 1. v t := val( t, ũ E π E, ρ) 2. Assume v t = s 0 v 3. T ( A(s 0 a), ũ s0 π s0, ρ[a v])
56 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1 1. v t := val( t, ũ E π E, ρ) 2. Assume v t = s 0 v 3. T ( A(s 0 a), ũ s0 π s0, ρ[a v]) 4. T ( A(t), ũ s0 π s0 ũ E π E, ρ)
57 Soundness of EA - Proof Data elimination [A E ] [A ɛ ] [A s0 ] [A s1 ]. π E Et. π ɛ A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(t). π s1 A(s 1 a) ũ E, ũ ɛ, ũ s0, ũ s1 Concatenation of integers assigned to A E, A ɛ, A s0, A s1 1. v t := val( t, ũ E π E, ρ) 2. Assume v t = s 0 v 3. T ( A(s 0 a), ũ s0 π s0, ρ[a v]) 4. T ( A(t), ũ s0 π s0 ũ E π E, ρ) 5. T ( A(t), ũ, ρ )
58 Soundness of EA - Consistency Theorem (Consistency) S 2 2 Con EA
59 Soundness of EA - Consistency Theorem (Consistency) S 2 2 Con EA Proof. S 2 2 Soundness Proposition
60 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
61 EA interprets PV
62 EA interprets PV 1. EA is almost equal to PV
63 EA interprets PV 1. EA is almost equal to PV 2. Only difference is EA requires to prove Et for each t used in the proof
64 EA interprets PV 1. EA is almost equal to PV 2. Only difference is EA requires to prove Et for each t used in the proof 3. Therefore we prove Et for every term t
65 EA interprets PV 1. EA is almost equal to PV 2. Only difference is EA requires to prove Et for each t used in the proof 3. Therefore we prove Et for every term t 4. But this fact can be derived by the totality Ea f (a) of every function f.
66 EA interprets PV 1. EA is almost equal to PV 2. Only difference is EA requires to prove Et for each t used in the proof 3. Therefore we prove Et for every term t 4. But this fact can be derived by the totality Ea f (a) of every function f. 5. We will prove the totality of f by induction on the definition of f.
67 EA interprets PV - Totality Since f is defined by ramified recurrence, we can assume where i 0,..., i n, j = 0, 1 Claim f : N i0 N in N j EA Ea Ef (a) Moreover, if i k = 0, in the proof Ea k is not used as assumptions of Et in the non-degenerated data elimination. We call i k the tier of a k.
68 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. By induction on the definition of f. We only consider of degenerated recurrence
69 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. Since f is defined by recurrence, f (0, a) = g(a) f (s 0 a, a) = g 0 (f (a, a), a, a) f (s 1 a, a) = g 1 (f (a, a), a, a) where tier of a is 1 and tier of f is 0.
70 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. We have the following axioms. Eg(a) f (0, a) = g(a) Eg 0 (f (a, a), a, a) f (s 0 a, a) = g 0 (f (a, a), a, a) Eg 1 (f (a, a), a, a) f (s 1 a, a) = g 1 (f (a, a), a, a).
71 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. Ef (a, a) Ef (a, a). Eg(a). Eg 0 (f (a, a), a, a). Eg 1 (f (a, a), a, a) Ea Ef (0, a) Ef (s 0 a, a) Ef (s 1 a, a) Ef (a, a)
72 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. Ef (a, a) Ef (a, a). Eg(a). Eg 0 (f (a, a), a, a). Eg 1 (f (a, a), a, a) Ea Ef (0, a) Ef (s 0 a, a) Ef (s 1 a, a) Ef (a, a) 1. Since the tier of f is 0, Ef (a, a) is not used as an assumption of the first premise Et of data elimination.
73 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. Ef (a, a) Ef (a, a). Eg(a). Eg 0 (f (a, a), a, a). Eg 1 (f (a, a), a, a) Ea Ef (0, a) Ef (s 0 a, a) Ef (s 1 a, a) Ef (a, a) 1. Since the tier of f is 0, Ef (a, a) is not used as an assumption of the first premise Et of data elimination. 2. Since the tier of a is 1, the condition of the claim is preserved.
74 EA interprets PV - Totality Proof. Ef (a, a) Ef (a, a). Eg(a). Eg 0 (f (a, a), a, a). Eg 1 (f (a, a), a, a) Ea Ef (0, a) Ef (s 0 a, a) Ef (s 1 a, a) Ef (a, a) 1. Since the tier of f is 0, Ef (a, a) is not used as an assumption of the first premise Et of data elimination. 2. Since the tier of a is 1, the condition of the claim is preserved.
75 EA interprets EA Proposition EA Ea, Γ(a) (a) EA π1 a n, Γ(a) (a) where π 1 is a dag-like proof and π 1 p( n ), p : polynomial.
76 EA interprets EA - proof Lemma EA π Ea A(a) EA π a n t(a) n π. where t is a term which appears in π and π p( n ).
77 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma
78 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A
79 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0
80 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0 s n E π E
81 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0 s 2 n E π E
82 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0 t(s 0 s 2 ) n s0 n E π E π s0
83 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma. π E Es. π 0 A(0). π s0 A(s 0 a) A(s). π s1 A(s 1 a) and t t(s) is a term of A By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0 t(s 0 s 2 ) n s0 n E π E π s0 t(s 1 s 2 ) n s1 n E π E π s1.
84 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma By induction hypothesis t(0) n 0 π 0 Combining these proofs with and equality axioms, we obtain t(s 0 s 2 ) n s0 n E π E π s0 t(s 1 s 2 ) n s1 n E π E π s1. s = 0 s = s 0 s 2 s = s 1 s 2
85 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Lemma t(s) n π Note that we are constructing a dag-like proof
86 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition We construct the EA -proof from the leaf of EA-proof to the conclusion.
87 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition Non-degenerate data elimination. σ E Et. σ ɛ A(0) [A(a)]. σ s0 A(s 0 a) A(t) [A(a)]. σ s1 A(s 1 a)
88 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition Non-degenerate data elimination. σ E Et. σ ɛ A(0) [A(a)]. σ s0 A(s 0 a) A(t) [A(a)]. σ s1 A(s 1 a) We use predicativity and the previous lemma σ E t n σ E
89 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition Non-degenerate data elimination. σ E Et. σ ɛ A(0) [A(a)]. σ s0 A(s 0 a) A(t) [A(a)]. σ s1 A(s 1 a) We use predicativity and the previous lemma σ E t n σ E =: n
90 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition Non-degenerate data elimination. σ E Et. σ ɛ A(0) [A(a)]. σ s0 A(s 0 a) A(t) [A(a)]. σ s1 A(s 1 a) We use predicativity and the previous lemma σ E t n σ E =: n By sub-induction on n, we construct the proof of a n A(a)
91 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition
92 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0)
93 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0) Assume we have a proof for A( n 2 )
94 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0) Assume we have a proof for A( n 2 ) By combining σ s0 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 0 n 2 ) σ s1 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 1 n 2 )
95 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0) Assume we have a proof for A( n 2 ) By combining σ s0 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 0 n 2 ) σ s1 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 1 n 2 ) t = t n 2 t = s 0 n 2 t = s 1 n 2
96 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0) Assume we have a proof for A( n 2 ) By combining σ s0 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 0 n 2 ) σ s1 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 1 n 2 ) and equational axioms t = t n 2 t = s 0 n 2 t = s 1 n 2
97 EA interprets EA - proof Proof of Proposition If n = 0, we have σ ɛ A(0) Assume we have a proof for A( n 2 ) By combining σ s0 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 0 n 2 ) σ s1 [ n 2 /a] A( n 2 ) A(s 1 n 2 ) and equational axioms t = t n 2 t = s 0 n 2 t = s 1 n 2
98 Open Problem Conjecture For enough large n N, there is no dag-like EA -proof such that π n Con EA (n)
99 Open Problem Conjecture For enough large n N, there is no dag-like EA -proof such that π n Con EA (n) Open problem Is the conjecture true?
100 Open problem - simple Gödel argument
101 Open problem - simple Gödel argument Definition (φ) EA φ(n) w n. Prf EA (w, φ(n) ) where Prf(w, φ(n) ) means there is a tree-like proof w of φ()
102 Open problem - simple Gödel argument Definition (φ) EA φ(n) w n. Prf EA (w, φ(n) ) where Prf(w, φ(n) ) means there is a tree-like proof w of φ() Fact There is a k such that k {}}{ Con EA ( n# #n) φ(n)
103 Open problem - simple Gödel argument Definition (φ) EA φ(n) w n. Prf EA (w, φ(n) ) where Prf(w, φ(n) ) means there is a tree-like proof w of φ() Fact There is a k such that k {}}{ Con EA ( n# #n) φ(n) But there is (apparently) no way to prove EA φ(n)
104 Open problem - speedup induction Fact (Buss, Ignjatović 1995) There is a fixed polynomial p such that for any φ, n, S i 2 x.φ(x) S 1 2 (Bb i ) p( n ) φ(n)
105 Open problem - speedup induction Fact (Buss, Ignjatović 1995) There is a fixed polynomial p such that for any φ, n, S i 2 x.φ(x) S 1 2 (Bb i ) p( n ) φ(n) Can be applied this technique to our case?
106 Open problem - speedup induction Fact (Buss, Ignjatović 1995) There is a fixed polynomial p such that for any φ, n, S i 2 x.φ(x) S 1 2 (Bb i ) p( n ) φ(n) Can be applied this technique to our case? No.
107 Open problem - speedup induction Reason
108 Open problem - speedup induction Reason k k {}}{{}}{ EA x. x# #x = x# #x
109 Open problem - speedup induction Reason but by soundness of EA k k {}}{{}}{ EA x. x# #x = x# #x π EA with arbitrary large k k k {}}{{}}{ n# #n = n# #n π k {}}{ n# #n
110 Outline Self introduction Summary Theories of PV and EA, EA Ramified recurrence Cook Urquhart s PV EA and EA S 2 2 Con EA Valuation and truth Soundness of EA PV Con EA? EA interprets PV EA interprets EA Open problem Conclusion and future work
111 Future work
112 Future work Consistency of dag-like EA proof Maybe achieved by replacing with max
113 Future work Consistency of dag-like EA proof Maybe achieved by replacing with max Counting argument on f : n {0, 1}
114 Future work Consistency of dag-like EA proof Maybe achieved by replacing with max Counting argument on f : n {0, 1} 1. There are 2 n such f
115 Future work Consistency of dag-like EA proof Maybe achieved by replacing with max Counting argument on f : n {0, 1} 1. There are 2 n such f 2. If Ef has a polynomial (respect to n ) length proof, f has a variation of 2 p( n ) (?)
116 Future work Consistency of dag-like EA proof Maybe achieved by replacing with max Counting argument on f : n {0, 1} 1. There are 2 n such f 2. If Ef has a polynomial (respect to n ) length proof, f has a variation of 2 p( n ) (?) 3. Contradiction(?)
117 Conclusion Defined EA such that S 2 2 Con EA S 1 2 Con EA EA p( n ) Con EA (n) where EA quantifier-free arithmetic with free logic, without induction Con EA consistency of tree-like EA -proof Con EA (n) consistency of tree-like EA -proofs which are smaller than n (as Gödel numbers) p(x) a polynomial bound of the size of dag-like proof of Con EA (n).
BOUNDED ARITHMETIC IN FREE LOGIC
Logical Methods in Computer Science Vol. 8 (3:07) 2012, pp. 1 38 www.lmcs-online.org Submitted Mar. 5, 2012 Published Aug. 10, 2012 BOUNDED ARITHMETIC IN FREE LOGIC YORIYUKI YAMAGATA National Institute
More informationProvably Total Functions of Arithmetic with Basic Terms
Provably Total Functions of Arithmetic with Basic Terms Evgeny Makarov INRIA Orsay, France emakarov@gmail.com A new characterization of provably recursive functions of first-order arithmetic is described.
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 informationModel theory of bounded arithmetic with applications to independence results. Morteza Moniri
Model theory of bounded arithmetic with applications to independence results Morteza Moniri Abstract In this paper we apply some new and some old methods in order to construct classical and intuitionistic
More informationAxiomatic Theories of Truth
Axiomatic Theories of Truth Graham Leigh University of Leeds LC 8, 8th July 28 Graham Leigh (University of Leeds) Axiomatic Theories of Truth LC 8, 8th July 28 1 / 15 Introduction Formalising Truth Formalising
More informationLogic: The Big Picture
Logic: The Big Picture A typical logic is described in terms of syntax: what are the legitimate formulas semantics: under what circumstances is a formula true proof theory/ axiomatization: rules for proving
More informationTransformation of Equational Theories and the Separation Problem of Bounded Arithmetic
Swansea University Department of Computer Science Transformation of Equational Theories and the Separation Problem of Bounded Arithmetic MRes Thesis by David R. Sherratt supervised by Prof. Arnold Beckmann
More informationHandbook of Logic and Proof Techniques for Computer Science
Steven G. Krantz Handbook of Logic and Proof Techniques for Computer Science With 16 Figures BIRKHAUSER SPRINGER BOSTON * NEW YORK Preface xvii 1 Notation and First-Order Logic 1 1.1 The Use of Connectives
More informationCompleteness for FOL
Completeness for FOL Overview Adding Witnessing Constants The Henkin Theory The Elimination Theorem The Henkin Construction Lemma 12 This lemma assures us that our construction of M h works for the atomic
More informationPropositional Logic: Part II - Syntax & Proofs 0-0
Propositional Logic: Part II - Syntax & Proofs 0-0 Outline Syntax of Propositional Formulas Motivating Proofs Syntactic Entailment and Proofs Proof Rules for Natural Deduction Axioms, theories and theorems
More informationFirst-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire
First-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire Laura Kovács 1,2 and Martin Suda 2 1 TU Wien 2 Chalmers Outline Introduction First-Order Logic and TPTP Inference Systems Saturation Algorithms Redundancy Elimination
More informationA Note on Bootstrapping Intuitionistic Bounded Arithmetic
A Note on Bootstrapping Intuitionistic Bounded Arithmetic SAMUEL R. BUSS Department of Mathematics University of California, San Diego Abstract This paper, firstly, discusses the relationship between Buss
More informationPropositional and Predicate Logic - XIII
Propositional and Predicate Logic - XIII Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK WS 2016/2017 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - XIII WS 2016/2017 1 / 22 Undecidability Introduction Recursive
More informationMathematical Logic. Reasoning in First Order Logic. Chiara Ghidini. FBK-IRST, Trento, Italy
Reasoning in First Order Logic FBK-IRST, Trento, Italy April 12, 2013 Reasoning tasks in FOL Model checking Question: Is φ true in the interpretation I with the assignment a? Answer: Yes if I = φ[a]. No
More informationExpander Construction in VNC 1
Expander Construction in VNC 1 Sam Buss joint work with Valentine Kabanets, Antonina Kolokolova & Michal Koucký Prague Workshop on Bounded Arithmetic November 2-3, 2017 Talk outline I. Combinatorial construction
More informationNatural Deduction. Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson
Natural Deduction Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson Outline 1. An example 1. Validity by truth table 2. Validity by proof 2. What s a proof 1. Proof checker 3. Rules of
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 informationBound and Free Variables. Theorems and Proofs. More valid formulas involving quantifiers:
Bound and Free Variables More valid formulas involving quantifiers: xp(x) x P(x) Replacing P by P, we get: x P(x) x P(x) Therefore x P(x) xp(x) Similarly, we have xp(x) x P(x) x P(x) xp(x) i(i 2 > i) is
More informationIntroduction to Intuitionistic Logic
Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic August 31, 2016 We deal exclusively with propositional intuitionistic logic. The language is defined as follows. φ := p φ ψ φ ψ φ ψ φ := φ and φ ψ := (φ ψ) (ψ φ). A
More informationLearning Goals of CS245 Logic and Computation
Learning Goals of CS245 Logic and Computation Alice Gao April 27, 2018 Contents 1 Propositional Logic 2 2 Predicate Logic 4 3 Program Verification 6 4 Undecidability 7 1 1 Propositional Logic Introduction
More informationMath 324 Summer 2012 Elementary Number Theory Notes on Mathematical Induction
Math 4 Summer 01 Elementary Number Theory Notes on Mathematical Induction Principle of Mathematical Induction Recall the following axiom for the set of integers. Well-Ordering Axiom for the Integers If
More informationOn the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs
On the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs Nikolai V. Krupski Department of Math. Logic and the Theory of Algorithms, Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics, Moscow State University, Moscow 119899,
More informationLecture 14 Rosser s Theorem, the length of proofs, Robinson s Arithmetic, and Church s theorem. Michael Beeson
Lecture 14 Rosser s Theorem, the length of proofs, Robinson s Arithmetic, and Church s theorem Michael Beeson The hypotheses needed to prove incompleteness The question immediate arises whether the incompleteness
More informationLecture 11: Measuring the Complexity of Proofs
IAS/PCMI Summer Session 2000 Clay Mathematics Undergraduate Program Advanced Course on Computational Complexity Lecture 11: Measuring the Complexity of Proofs David Mix Barrington and Alexis Maciel July
More informationPropositional Calculus - Hilbert system H Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST
Propositional Calculus - Hilbert system H Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST moonzoo@cs.kaist.ac.kr http://pswlab.kaist.ac.kr/courses/cs402-07 1 Review Goal of logic To check whether given a formula
More informationNotation for Logical Operators:
Notation for Logical Operators: always true always false... and...... or... if... then...... if-and-only-if... x:x p(x) x:x p(x) for all x of type X, p(x) there exists an x of type X, s.t. p(x) = is equal
More informationPredicate Calculus - Semantic Tableau (2/2) Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST
Predicate Calculus - Semantic Tableau (2/2) Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST moonzoo@cs.kaist.ac.kr http://pswlab.kaist.ac.kr/courses/cs402-07 1 Formal construction is explained in two steps
More informationPart I: Propositional Calculus
Logic Part I: Propositional Calculus Statements Undefined Terms True, T, #t, 1 False, F, #f, 0 Statement, Proposition Statement/Proposition -- Informal Definition Statement = anything that can meaningfully
More informationFirst-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire. Laura Kovács (Chalmers University of Technology) Andrei Voronkov (The University of Manchester)
First-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire Laura Kovács (Chalmers University of Technology) Andrei Voronkov (The University of Manchester) Outline Introduction First-Order Logic and TPTP Inference Systems
More informationMATH 324 Summer 2011 Elementary Number Theory. Notes on Mathematical Induction. Recall the following axiom for the set of integers.
MATH 4 Summer 011 Elementary Number Theory Notes on Mathematical Induction Principle of Mathematical Induction Recall the following axiom for the set of integers. Well-Ordering Axiom for the Integers If
More informationPropositional Logic: Syntax
Logic Logic is a tool for formalizing reasoning. There are lots of different logics: probabilistic logic: for reasoning about probability temporal logic: for reasoning about time (and programs) epistemic
More informationExercises 1 - Solutions
Exercises 1 - Solutions SAV 2013 1 PL validity For each of the following propositional logic formulae determine whether it is valid or not. If it is valid prove it, otherwise give a counterexample. Note
More informationHomework #2 Solutions Due: September 5, for all n N n 3 = n2 (n + 1) 2 4
Do the following exercises from the text: Chapter (Section 3):, 1, 17(a)-(b), 3 Prove that 1 3 + 3 + + n 3 n (n + 1) for all n N Proof The proof is by induction on n For n N, let S(n) be the statement
More informationA Schütte-Tait style cut-elimination proof for first-order Gödel logic
A Schütte-Tait style cut-elimination proof for first-order Gödel logic Matthias Baaz and Agata Ciabattoni Technische Universität Wien, A-1040 Vienna, Austria {agata,baaz}@logic.at Abstract. We present
More informationMat 243 Exam 1 Review
OBJECTIVES (Review problems: on next page) 1.1 Distinguish between propositions and non-propositions. Know the truth tables (i.e., the definitions) of the logical operators,,,, and Write truth tables for
More informationFast Growing Functions and Arithmetical Independence Results
Fast Growing Functions and Arithmetical Independence Results Stanley S. Wainer (Leeds UK) Stanford, March 2013 1. Intro A Mathematical Incompleteness Are there any genuine mathematical examples of incompleteness?
More informationGödel s Incompleteness Theorem. Overview. Computability and Logic
Gödel s Incompleteness Theorem Overview Computability and Logic Recap Remember what we set out to do in this course: Trying to find a systematic method (algorithm, procedure) which we can use to decide,
More informationSoftware Engineering using Formal Methods
Software Engineering using Formal Methods First-Order Logic Wolfgang Ahrendt 26th September 2013 SEFM: First-Order Logic 130926 1 / 53 Install the KeY-Tool... KeY used in Friday s exercise Requires: Java
More informationNatural Deduction for Propositional Logic
Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic Bow-Yaw Wang Institute of Information Science Academia Sinica, Taiwan September 10, 2018 Bow-Yaw Wang (Academia Sinica) Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic
More informationGödel s Incompleteness Theorem. Overview. Computability and Logic
Gödel s Incompleteness Theorem Overview Computability and Logic Recap Remember what we set out to do in this course: Trying to find a systematic method (algorithm, procedure) which we can use to decide,
More informationYour quiz in recitation on Tuesday will cover 3.1: Arguments and inference. Your also have an online quiz, covering 3.1, due by 11:59 p.m., Tuesday.
Friday, February 15 Today we will begin Course Notes 3.2: Methods of Proof. Your quiz in recitation on Tuesday will cover 3.1: Arguments and inference. Your also have an online quiz, covering 3.1, due
More informationLecture 1: Logical Foundations
Lecture 1: Logical Foundations Zak Kincaid January 13, 2016 Logics have two components: syntax and semantics Syntax: defines the well-formed phrases of the language. given by a formal grammar. Typically
More information03 Review of First-Order Logic
CAS 734 Winter 2014 03 Review of First-Order Logic William M. Farmer Department of Computing and Software McMaster University 18 January 2014 What is First-Order Logic? First-order logic is the study of
More informationPacket #1: Logic & Proofs. Applied Discrete Mathematics
Packet #1: Logic & Proofs Applied Discrete Mathematics Table of Contents Course Objectives Page 2 Propositional Calculus Information Pages 3-13 Course Objectives At the conclusion of this course, you should
More informationKRIPKE S THEORY OF TRUTH 1. INTRODUCTION
KRIPKE S THEORY OF TRUTH RICHARD G HECK, JR 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this note is to give a simple, easily accessible proof of the existence of the minimal fixed point, and of various maximal fixed
More informationLecture 15 The Second Incompleteness Theorem. Michael Beeson
Lecture 15 The Second Incompleteness Theorem Michael Beeson The Second Incompleteness Theorem Let Con PA be the formula k Prf(k, 0 = 1 ) Then Con PA expresses the consistency of PA. The second incompleteness
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 informationA Tight Karp-Lipton Collapse Result in Bounded Arithmetic
A Tight Karp-Lipton Collapse Result in Bounded Arithmetic Olaf Beyersdorff 1 Sebastian Müller 2 1 Institut für Theoretische Informatik, Leibniz-Universität Hannover 2 Institut für Informatik, Humboldt-Universität
More informationMCS-236: Graph Theory Handout #A4 San Skulrattanakulchai Gustavus Adolphus College Sep 15, Methods of Proof
MCS-36: Graph Theory Handout #A4 San Skulrattanakulchai Gustavus Adolphus College Sep 15, 010 Methods of Proof Consider a set of mathematical objects having a certain number of operations and relations
More informationKleene realizability and negative translations
Q E I U G I C Kleene realizability and negative translations Alexandre Miquel O P. D E. L Ō A U D E L A R April 21th, IMERL Plan 1 Kleene realizability 2 Gödel-Gentzen negative translation 3 Lafont-Reus-Streicher
More informationDual-Intuitionistic Logic and Some Other Logics
Dual-Intuitionistic Logic and Some Other Logics Hiroshi Aoyama 1 Introduction This paper is a sequel to Aoyama(2003) and Aoyama(2004). In this paper, we will study various proof-theoretic and model-theoretic
More informationArithmetical classification of the set of all provably recursive functions
Arithmetical classification of the set of all provably recursive functions Vítězslav Švejdar April 12, 1999 The original publication is available at CMUC. Abstract The set of all indices of all functions
More information5. Peano arithmetic and Gödel s incompleteness theorem
5. Peano arithmetic and Gödel s incompleteness theorem In this chapter we give the proof of Gödel s incompleteness theorem, modulo technical details treated in subsequent chapters. The incompleteness theorem
More information02 Propositional Logic
SE 2F03 Fall 2005 02 Propositional Logic Instructor: W. M. Farmer Revised: 25 September 2005 1 What is Propositional Logic? Propositional logic is the study of the truth or falsehood of propositions or
More informationPredicate Logic. Xinyu Feng 09/26/2011. University of Science and Technology of China (USTC)
University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) 09/26/2011 Overview Predicate logic over integer expressions: a language of logical assertions, for example x. x + 0 = x Why discuss predicate logic?
More informationPřednáška 12. Důkazové kalkuly Kalkul Hilbertova typu. 11/29/2006 Hilbertův kalkul 1
Přednáška 12 Důkazové kalkuly Kalkul Hilbertova typu 11/29/2006 Hilbertův kalkul 1 Formal systems, Proof calculi A proof calculus (of a theory) is given by: A. a language B. a set of axioms C. a set of
More informationLarge Numbers, Busy Beavers, Noncomputability and Incompleteness
Large Numbers, Busy Beavers, Noncomputability and Incompleteness Food For Thought November 1, 2007 Sam Buss Department of Mathematics U.C. San Diego PART I Large Numbers, Busy Beavers, and Undecidability
More informationAxiomatic Semantics. Semantics of Programming Languages course. Joosep Rõõmusaare
Axiomatic Semantics Semantics of Programming Languages course Joosep Rõõmusaare 2014 Direct Proofs of Program Correctness Partial correctness properties are properties expressing that if a given program
More informationLogical Closure Properties of Propositional Proof Systems
of Logical of Propositional Institute of Theoretical Computer Science Leibniz University Hannover Germany Theory and Applications of Models of Computation 2008 Outline of Propositional of Definition (Cook,
More informationChapter 11: Automated Proof Systems
Chapter 11: Automated Proof Systems SYSTEM RS OVERVIEW Hilbert style systems are easy to define and admit a simple proof of the Completeness Theorem but they are difficult to use. Automated systems are
More informationGödel s Incompleteness Theorems
Seminar Report Gödel s Incompleteness Theorems Ahmet Aspir Mark Nardi 28.02.2018 Supervisor: Dr. Georg Moser Abstract Gödel s incompleteness theorems are very fundamental for mathematics and computational
More informationPropositional Logic Language
Propositional Logic Language A logic consists of: an alphabet A, a language L, i.e., a set of formulas, and a binary relation = between a set of formulas and a formula. An alphabet A consists of a finite
More informationPROOFS IN PREDICATE LOGIC AND COMPLETENESS; WHAT DECIDABILITY MEANS HUTH AND RYAN 2.3, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 2
PROOFS IN PREDICATE LOGIC AND COMPLETENESS; WHAT DECIDABILITY MEANS HUTH AND RYAN 2.3, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 2 Neil D. Jones DIKU 2005 12 September, 2005 Some slides today new, some based on logic 2004 (Nils
More informationMotivation. CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning. Lecture 10: Overview of First-Order Theories. Signature and Axioms of First-Order Theory
Motivation CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning Lecture 10: Overview of First-Order Theories Işıl Dillig Last few lectures: Full first-order logic In FOL, functions/predicates are uninterpreted (i.e., structure
More informationLOGIC PROPOSITIONAL REASONING
LOGIC PROPOSITIONAL REASONING WS 2017/2018 (342.208) Armin Biere Martina Seidl biere@jku.at martina.seidl@jku.at Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler Universität Linz Version 2018.1
More informationGeneric cuts in models of Peano arithmetic
Generic cuts in models of Peano arithmetic Tin Lok Wong University of Birmingham, United Kingdom Joint work with Richard Kaye (Birmingham) 5 August, 2009 Preliminary definitions L A is the first-order
More informationTRUTH-THEORIES FOR FRAGMENTS OF PA
TRUTH-THEORIES FOR FRAGMENTS OF PA RICHARD G. HECK, JR. The discussion here follows Petr Hájek and Pavel Pudlák, Metamathematics of First-order Arithmetic (Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1993). See especially
More informationBounded Arithmetic, Expanders, and Monotone Propositional Proofs
Bounded Arithmetic, Expanders, and Monotone Propositional Proofs joint work with Valentine Kabanets, Antonina Kolokolova & Michal Koucký Takeuti Symposium on Advances in Logic Kobe, Japan September 20,
More informationFundamentals of Software Engineering
Fundamentals of Software Engineering First-Order Logic Ina Schaefer Institute for Software Systems Engineering TU Braunschweig, Germany Slides by Wolfgang Ahrendt, Richard Bubel, Reiner Hähnle (Chalmers
More informationMathematics 114L Spring 2018 D.A. Martin. Mathematical Logic
Mathematics 114L Spring 2018 D.A. Martin Mathematical Logic 1 First-Order Languages. Symbols. All first-order languages we consider will have the following symbols: (i) variables v 1, v 2, v 3,... ; (ii)
More informationResolution for mixed Post logic
Resolution for mixed Post logic Vladimir Komendantsky Institute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of Science, Volkhonka 14, 119992 Moscow, Russia vycom@pochtamt.ru Abstract. In this paper we present a resolution
More informationCS156: The Calculus of Computation
Page 1 of 31 CS156: The Calculus of Computation Zohar Manna Winter 2010 Chapter 3: First-Order Theories Page 2 of 31 First-Order Theories I First-order theory T consists of Signature Σ T - set of constant,
More informationFirst-Order Predicate Logic. Basics
First-Order Predicate Logic Basics 1 Syntax of predicate logic: terms A variable is a symbol of the form x i where i = 1, 2, 3.... A function symbol is of the form fi k where i = 1, 2, 3... und k = 0,
More informationA Tableau Calculus for Minimal Modal Model Generation
M4M 2011 A Tableau Calculus for Minimal Modal Model Generation Fabio Papacchini 1 and Renate A. Schmidt 2 School of Computer Science, University of Manchester Abstract Model generation and minimal model
More informationPredicate Logic. Xinyu Feng 11/20/2013. University of Science and Technology of China (USTC)
University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) 11/20/2013 Overview Predicate logic over integer expressions: a language of logical assertions, for example x. x + 0 = x Why discuss predicate logic?
More informationOutline. Overview. Syntax Semantics. Introduction Hilbert Calculus Natural Deduction. 1 Introduction. 2 Language: Syntax and Semantics
Introduction Arnd Poetzsch-Heffter Software Technology Group Fachbereich Informatik Technische Universität Kaiserslautern Sommersemester 2010 Arnd Poetzsch-Heffter ( Software Technology Group Fachbereich
More informationChapter 11: Automated Proof Systems (1)
Chapter 11: Automated Proof Systems (1) SYSTEM RS OVERVIEW Hilbert style systems are easy to define and admit a simple proof of the Completeness Theorem but they are difficult to use. Automated systems
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 informationApplied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw
Applied Logic Lecture 1 - Propositional logic Marcin Szczuka Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw Monographic lecture, Spring semester 2017/2018 Marcin Szczuka (MIMUW) Applied Logic 2018
More informationImplicit Computational Complexity:
Implicit Computational Complexity: A µ-tutorial Ugo Dal Lago Simone Martini Dipartimento di Scienze dell Informazione Università di Bologna FOLLIA meeting, January 19th 2006 Outline What is Implicit Computational
More informationTHE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Second Semester COMP2600/COMP6260 (Formal Methods for Software Engineering)
THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Second Semester 2016 COMP2600/COMP6260 (Formal Methods for Software Engineering) Writing Period: 3 hours duration Study Period: 15 minutes duration Permitted Materials:
More informationThe Deduction Rule and Linear and Near-linear Proof Simulations
The Deduction Rule and Linear and Near-linear Proof Simulations Maria Luisa Bonet Department of Mathematics University of California, San Diego Samuel R. Buss Department of Mathematics University of California,
More informationFirst-Order Logic First-Order Theories. Roopsha Samanta. Partly based on slides by Aaron Bradley and Isil Dillig
First-Order Logic First-Order Theories Roopsha Samanta Partly based on slides by Aaron Bradley and Isil Dillig Roadmap Review: propositional logic Syntax and semantics of first-order logic (FOL) Semantic
More informationSKETCHY NOTES FOR WEEKS 7 AND 8
SKETCHY NOTES FOR WEEKS 7 AND 8 We are now ready to start work on the proof of the Completeness Theorem for first order logic. Before we start a couple of remarks are in order (1) When we studied propositional
More informationTruth and Paradox. Leon Horsten. Summer School on Set Theory and Higher-Order Logic London, 1 6 August Truth and Paradox.
Summer School on Set and Higher-Order Logic London, 1 6 August 2011 Structure of the Tutorial 1. Introduction: 2. Definition, 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. of Truth 8. Tarski-biconditionals The disquotational intuition:
More informationFundamentals of Software Engineering
Fundamentals of Software Engineering First-Order Logic Ina Schaefer Institute for Software Systems Engineering TU Braunschweig, Germany Slides by Wolfgang Ahrendt, Richard Bubel, Reiner Hähnle (Chalmers
More informationWarm-Up Problem. Is the following true or false? 1/35
Warm-Up Problem Is the following true or false? 1/35 Propositional Logic: Resolution Carmen Bruni Lecture 6 Based on work by J Buss, A Gao, L Kari, A Lubiw, B Bonakdarpour, D Maftuleac, C Roberts, R Trefler,
More informationCVO103: Programming Languages. Lecture 2 Inductive Definitions (2)
CVO103: Programming Languages Lecture 2 Inductive Definitions (2) Hakjoo Oh 2018 Spring Hakjoo Oh CVO103 2018 Spring, Lecture 2 March 13, 2018 1 / 20 Contents More examples of inductive definitions natural
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 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 informationLogical Preliminaries
Logical Preliminaries Johannes C. Flieger Scheme UK March 2003 Abstract Survey of intuitionistic and classical propositional logic; introduction to the computational interpretation of intuitionistic logic
More informationPredicate Logic. Andreas Klappenecker
Predicate Logic Andreas Klappenecker Predicates A function P from a set D to the set Prop of propositions is called a predicate. The set D is called the domain of P. Example Let D=Z be the set of integers.
More informationIntroduction to Metalogic
Philosophy 135 Spring 2008 Tony Martin Introduction to Metalogic 1 The semantics of sentential logic. The language L of sentential logic. Symbols of L: Remarks: (i) sentence letters p 0, p 1, p 2,... (ii)
More informationThe Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic
The Importance of Being Formal Martin Henz February 5, 2014 Propositional Logic 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets, and therefore, propositions are limited to stating facts on sets
More informationPHIL12A Section answers, 28 Feb 2011
PHIL12A Section answers, 28 Feb 2011 Julian Jonker 1 How much do you know? Give formal proofs for the following arguments. 1. (Ex 6.18) 1 A B 2 A B 1 A B 2 A 3 A B Elim: 2 4 B 5 B 6 Intro: 4,5 7 B Intro:
More informationHandout: Proof of the completeness theorem
MATH 457 Introduction to Mathematical Logic Spring 2016 Dr. Jason Rute Handout: Proof of the completeness theorem Gödel s Compactness Theorem 1930. For a set Γ of wffs and a wff ϕ, we have the following.
More informationPart 1: Propositional Logic
Part 1: Propositional Logic Literature (also for first-order logic) Schöning: Logik für Informatiker, Spektrum Fitting: First-Order Logic and Automated Theorem Proving, Springer 1 Last time 1.1 Syntax
More informationOverview. I Review of natural deduction. I Soundness and completeness. I Semantics of propositional formulas. I Soundness proof. I Completeness proof.
Overview I Review of natural deduction. I Soundness and completeness. I Semantics of propositional formulas. I Soundness proof. I Completeness proof. Propositional formulas Grammar: ::= p j (:) j ( ^ )
More informationClassical Propositional Logic
The Language of A Henkin-style Proof for Natural Deduction January 16, 2013 The Language of A Henkin-style Proof for Natural Deduction Logic Logic is the science of inference. Given a body of information,
More informationCOMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking. Proofs. Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Rice University
COMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking Proofs Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Rice University 1 Reading Material Chapter 1, Section 3, 6, 7, 8 Propositional Equivalences The compound propositions p and q are called
More information