First-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms
|
|
- Oliver McKinney
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 Vocabulary First order vocabulary allows us to talk about domain of discourse. It is like obtaining a set of propositional variables as one can define a set of FO formulas using the vocabulary. It consists of A set of relation symbols with associated arities. P, Q, R,... A set of function symbols with associated arities. f, g, h,... A set of constant symbols (0-ary functions). a, b, c Examples of FO vocabularies: 1. Relation Set = { V : unary, E : binary } Function Set = { next : unary } 2. Relation Set = { + : ternary, : ternary, : ternary, = : binary, < : binary } Function Set = { next : unary, 0 : const } Terms A term denotes an element in the FO structure. Assume a set of variables [symbols] x, y, z,... in addition to the vocabulary. Set of terms over a given vocabulary is smallest set T containing all variables, constants such that for every k-ary function f of vocabulary, if t 1, t 2,... t k is a term then f(t 1, t 2,..., t k ) is a term in T. Or 1
2 Every variable is a term. Every constant is a term. If t 1, t 2,..., t k is a terms and f is a k-ary function then f(t 1, t 2,..., t k ) is a term. Examples of terms: x, a, f(x, y), g(x, f(x, y), a). Atomic Formulas An atomic formula is R(t 1, t 2,..., t k ), where R is a k-ary relation and t 1, t 2,..., t k are terms. = is a special binary relation always interpreted as semantic equality. For example, t 1 = t 2 stands for = (t 1, t 2 ) FO Formulas Built using a given FO vocabulary and variables and the symbols (, ),,,,,,, it is the smallest set containing the atomic formulas such that if φ and ψ are formulas and x is a variable, then it also contains : 1. (φ ψ), (φ ψ), ( φ), (φ ψ) 2. ( xφ), ( xφ) This is just the syntax, to give semantics one has to give an interpretation to the symbols of the vocabulary and associate truth value to a formula. 2 Semantics Semantics is defined relative to an interpretation of vocabulary, given by a FO structure. FO Structure A FO structure over a given vocabulary consists of a domain (set of elements) D. A mapping associating to every k-ary relation symbol in the vocabulary a k-ary relation over the domain, and to every k-ary function symbol a k-ary function over the domain and to each constant c, an element of D. 2
3 Example: Relation Set = { + : ternary, : ternary, : ternary, = : binary, < : binary } Function Set = { next : unary, 0 : const } A FO structure over this vocabulary is: Domain: the set of integers Mapping : + addition, multiplication, exponentiation, < ordering, next i + 1 In this structure, the formula x y z[(x > 1) (x, y, z) ((y = 1) (z = 1))] expresses the statement there exists a prime number. Note: (x, y, z) is equivalent to (x = y z) Before we can give a meaning to the complete formula we need to give meaning to quantifiers. Intuitively, we can see that above formula can be assigned a truth value. If we remove the x from above formula, we cannot assign a truth value to it since the truth value of depends upon value of x. Scope of Quantifiers In the formula ( xφ) (or ( xφ)), φ is referred to as the scope of quantification of the variable x. An occurrence of a variable x in a formula is quantified if it is in the scope of quantification of x or x. A quantified variable is bound to the closest quantifier that applies to it. A variable is free if it is not (bound) quantified. Sentences A sentence is a formula with no free variables. A sentence is either true or false i.e. can be assigned a truth value. A formula with free variable(s) can be considered as describing the properties of the free variable(s). For example, φ(x) denotes a formula with x occurring free and describes the properties of x. 3
4 If a sentence φ evaluates to true over a structure I, we say I satisfies φ and denote this by I = φ. = is defined by structural induction on the formula φ. 1. I = R(t 1, t 2,..., t k ) if (t 1, t 2,..., t k ) I(R), where I(R) is the interpretation of R by I. 2. I = φ ψ if I = φ and I = ψ. (Similar for ) 3. I = ϕ if I = ϕ. 4. I = xφ(x) if I = φ(x c) for some c in the domain. 5. I = xφ(x) if I = φ(x c) for every c in the domain. Note: φ(x c) denotes the result of substituting c for every free occurrence of x in φ. (More to come on substitution in the next section.) Valid Sentence : one which is satisfied by every interpretation (model) of vocabulary. Examples : x(x = x) x(φ(x) ψ(x)) ( x(φ(x))) ( x(ψ(x))) xφ(x) x φ(x) Satisfiable Sentence : one which is satisfied by some interpretation (model) of vocabulary. Example : x(p (x, x)) Unsatisfiable Sentence : one which is satisfied by no interpretation (model) of vocabulary. Examples : x( (x = x)) x(p (x) P (x)) 3 Axiomatic approach Axioms The axioms are a set of sentences meant to distinguish desired models from others. But typically, also have undesired models, which are called nonstandard models. 4
5 Example: Consider the vocabulary (σ, +,,, 0, =, <), where the symbols have the usual meaning (defined by FO sentences over this vocabulary). The standard interpretation for this set of axioms is the integers, but these are also satisfied by the set of integers modulo p. This possibility is ruled out by adding the following sentence to the axioms. x(x < σ(x)) Question: Can all non-standard models be axiomatized away? The answer is NO. Consider the model shown in Fig. 1 for the vocabulary containing only 0, <, σ (all elements in the upper line are larger than those on the lower line). There is no set of FO sentences which can distinguish this model from the natural numbers. Intuitively, the reason is that we cannot backtrack arbitrarily (towards 0) in an FO sentence or in other words first order does not allow us to specify axioms like every n N has finitely many predecessors. A similar non-standard model can be obtained for the full vocabulary above. 4 Evaluating FO Sentences Given an FO structure I and a FO sentence φ, can we tell if I = φ? i.e. how to evaluate φ over I. This problem is decidable for finite structures. Example : Suppose interpretation I = (V, E) is a finite graph where E is a binary relation representing the edges of a graph, and the given sentence is x 1 x 2 x 3 (E(x 1, x 2 ) E(x 2, x 3 ) E(x 3, x 1 ) x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 1 ). We can evaluate the truth of this sentence by trying all possible values for x 1, x 2 and x 3. (Naive evaluation : nested loop where for each quantification we introduce a new loop) This is polynomial time in size of the domain but exponential in the size of the formula. On infinite domains, the above brute force approach does not work. We may or may not be able to evaluate the truth of a sentence. Examples : 5
6 L All numbers in L are larger than those in L L Figure 1: A Non-standard model With the vocabulary (N, 0, σ, <, +), where N is the set of natural numbers, it is decidable if a sentence is true. (This is known as Presburger arithmetic.) However if we include multiplication, the truth of a sentence becomes undecidable. 5 A Deductive System for FO Introduction A set of FO sentences is 6
7 Satisfiable if there is some structure/interpretation/model I such that I = Unsatisfiable if it is not satisfiable Valid if I = for all structures/interpretations I Given a set of FO sentences Σ and a sentence φ Σ entails φ (denoted Σ = φ), if every structure which satisfies Σ also satisfies φ. Σ = φ iff Σ { φ} is unsatisfiable. If Σ is finite then, Σ = φ iff Σ φ is valid. If a formula φ has free variables X = (x 1,..., x k ), φ is valid iff Xφ is valid. Axioms for Validity The axioms for validity are of three types: 1. Axioms for boolean validity. These are inherited from propositional logic. 2. Axioms for equality. 3. Axioms for quantification. The set of axioms mentioned above is sound and complete for FO sentences and the completeness is shown by Godel s theorem. Boolean Validity Given a FO formula ϕ, a boolean form of ϕ is a propositional formula ψ such that ϕ is obtained from ψ by replacing each propositional variable in ψ by a sub-formula of ϕ. The set of Boolean forms of ϕ is denoted BF (ϕ). Examples: For the FO formula xp (x) xp (x), the boolean form is p p. If ϕ xg(x, y) xg(x, y) (G(z, x) xg(x, y)), then BF (ϕ) x 1 x 3 (x 2 x 1 ) where x 1 = xg(x, y), x 2 = G(z, x), x 3 = xg(x, y). Claim: If ψ BF (ϕ) and ψ is valid, then ϕ is valid. 7
8 Equality Axioms Let t, t 1,..., t k, t 1,..., t k be terms. The following are valid formulas. t = t (t 1 = t 1 t k = t k ) (f(t 1,..., t k ) = f(t 1,..., t k )), where f is a k-ary function. (t 1 = t 1 t k = t k ) (R(t 1,..., t k ) R(t 1,..., t k )), where R is a k-ary relation. Substitutions Given a formula ϕ in which variable x occurs free (denoted by ϕ(x)) and a term t, we define the substitution of t for x in ϕ, denoted ϕ(x t), as the formula that results from replacing every free occurrence of x in ϕ by t, subject to the constraint that t contains no variable y quantified in ϕ such that x occurs free within the scope of quantification of y. If x does not occur free ϕ, then ϕ(x t) is defined as ϕ. Example: Let ϕ be ((x = 1) x(x = y)), then ϕ(x (y + 1)) is a valid substitution ϕ(y (x + 1)) is not a valid substitution. Quantification Axioms 1. xϕ ϕ(x t), where t is a term and ϕ(x t) is a valid substitution 2. ( x(ϕ ψ)) (( xϕ) ( xψ)) 3. ϕ xϕ 4. xϕ x ϕ In summary, the axioms for validity are Ax: 1. Axioms for boolean validity. These are inherited from propositional logic. 2. Axioms for equality. 3. Axioms for quantification. 8
9 Definition A proof is a sequence φ 1, φ 2,..., φ k of FO sentences such that for each i {1,..., k} either φ i Ax or j, k < i such that φ j ψ and φ k (ψ φ i ). Notation If there is a proof of φ using Ax, we denote this fact by Ax φ. Fact (Soundness) If Ax φ, then φ is valid. (This is easy to see because Axioms are valid and modus ponens, used in the proof, is also valid). The set of formulas which can be proved valid is recursively enu- Remark merable. Example: Proof of the formula x(φ ψ) ( xφ xψ) x(φ ψ) x(φ ψ) (φ ψ)(x x) φ ψ φ x(φ ψ) φ x( x(φ ψ) φ) x x(φ ψ) xφ x(φ ψ) xφ xφ The proof of xψ is symmetrical. xφ xψ x(φ ψ) ( xφ xψ) Useful Equivalences x(φ ψ) ( xφ) xψ) x(φ ψ) ( xφ) xψ) x(φ ψ) ( xφ) xψ) xφ x φ xφ x φ e.g. φ(x) x is even x(φ(x) φ(x)) ( xφ(x) x φ(x)) 9
10 Prenex Normal Form Claim Every FO sentence is equivalent to a FO sentence of the form θ 1 x 1 θ k x k φ, where θ i {, } and φ is quantifier free. This is proved using the distributive properties of quantifiers. It may be necessary to rename variables, to avoid ambiguities (which can result in exponentially many variables). Example: φ x(g(x, x) ( yg(x, y) y G(y, y))) G(x, 0) ( x(g(x, x) ( yg(x, y) y G(y, y))) G(w, 0) x(g(x, x) ( yg(x, y) y G(y, y)) G(w, 0)) x(g(x, x) ( yg(x, y) z G(z, z)) G(w, 0)) x(g(x, x) y(g(x, y) z G(z, z)) G(w, 0)) x y(g(x, x) (G(x, y) z G(z, z)) G(w, 0)) x y(g(x, x) z(g(x, y) G(z, z)) G(w, 0)) x y z(g(x, x) (G(x, y) G(z, z)) G(w, 0)) Recall the Axiomatic Method 1 Describe the desired model as closely as possible using a (possibly infinite but recursive) set of axioms (FO sentences). 2 Prove things using deduction. Notation We say φ is a valid consequence of (denoted = φ), if every model satisfying also satisfies φ. Fact Σ = φ iff Σ { φ} is unsatisfiable. Useful Facts About Deduction 1 If {φ} ψ then φ ψ. Proof (for the case when = ). Proceed by induction on the length of the proof. 10
11 (base case) If the proof has length 1 then it is easy to see that if φ φ then φ φ is true. (induction step) Suppose there exists a proof of ψ from φ which has length n + 1, φ 1, φ 2,..., φ n+1, where φ 1 φ and φ n+1 ψ. From the induction hypothesis, φ 1 φ j for j {1,..., n}. Distinguish the following possibilities for the last step applied in the proof: φ n+1 is an axiom. Then the required conclusion is obtained from: φ n+1 and φ n+1 (φ 1 φ n+1 ) ( a tautology in Ax, by modus ponens. i, j n such that φ i ξ and φ j ξ φ n+1. Using the following tautology: (φ 1 ξ) ((φ 1 (ξ φ n+1 )) (φ 1 φ n+1 )) together with φ 1 ξ and φ 1 (ξ φ n+1 ), the result follows by applying modus ponens twice. 2 If { φ} is inconsistent then φ. Proof Using 1, we get { φ} implies φ, which implies that φ is valid. Gödel s Completeness Theorem Theorem 1 Theorem 2 (Completeness of Ax) If = σ then σ If is consistent ( ) then is satisfiable. Note It is easy to see that Theorem 2 implies Theorem 1: If = σ then { σ} is unsatisfiable, which by Theorem 2 implies that { σ} is inconsistent. Using 2 above, we obtain σ. Idea of the proof (for Theorem 2): Start with over vocabulary Σ, which is consistent. Then build a syntactic model for it from the terms of the language and then populate relations and functions consistently with. Sketch of the proof The universe will be made up from terms. 11
12 1 The terms may not suffice 1. Therefore, we change the base alphabet Σ to Σ by adding an infinite set of constants to Σ. Observe that if is consistent over Σ then is consistent over Σ. (To obtain a contradiction, suppose over Σ. Then, if the constants c i used in the proof of are replaced by variables x i, the resulting sequence of formulas is a proof of over Σ. Hence, over Σ, which contradicts the hypothesis that is consistent over Σ.) 2 Next, we augment to a complete and consistent, complete meaning that for every σ, σ or σ. Consider an enumeration φ 1, φ 2,..., φ i,... of all sentences over Σ and define sets i inductively as follows: 0 = If i 1 {φ i } is consistent and φ i is not xψ for some ψ, then i = i 1 {φ i }. If i 1 {φ i } is consistent and φ i is xψ for some ψ, then i = i 1 {φ i, ψ(x c)}, where c is a new constant. If i 1 {φ i } is inconsistent and φ i is not xψ, then i = i 1 { ψ i }. If i 1 {φ i } is inconsistent and φ i is xψ for some ψ, then i = i 1 { ψ i, ψ(x c)}, where c is a new constant. Claims A) Take = 0 i i. It can be shown that for all i 0, i is consistent. B) is consistent and complete. 3 The last step is building a model for. Since, this model will be a model for. 1 If is { xp (x)} { P (t) t is a term over Σ} then is consistent, but a model for it cannot be described using only terms. 12
13 Universe: Consider the equivalence relation = on terms over Σ defined by t = t iff t = t. The elements of the universe are the equivalence classes of this relation. Denote by [t] the equivalence class of t. Functions: For a function symbol f, f([t 1 ],..., f[t k ]) = [f(t 1,..., t k )]. It is easy to show that functions defined this way are well defined. Relations: For a relation symbol R, R([t 1 ],..., [t k ]) iff R(t 1,..., t k ). It can be shown that relations so defined are well defined. Claim: M = σ iff σ. This implies that M =, which implies M =. Consequences of Gödel s Completeness Theorem Soundness and Completeness = σ iff σ Validity {σ = σ} is recursively enumerable. Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem model. If has a model, then it has a countable Compactness Theorem is satisfiable. If every finite subset of is satisfiable, then Proof Suppose that every finite subset of is satisfiable but is unsatisfiable. Then is inconsistent, which implies. Consider a proof of from. Only finitely many sentences from occur in the proof, say fin. But if this is the case, fin and it follows from the soundness of the system that fin =, i.e. fin is unsatisfiable. This contradicts the hypothesis. Variation of Compactness Theorem: finite subset fin of such that fin = σ. If = σ then there exists a Applications of Compactness Theorem Proposition model. If has arbitrarily large finite models then it has an infinite 13
14 Proof Suppose defines finiteness. Let σ k x 1 x k ( i j x i x j ). Obviously, σ k is satisfied by models of size at least k. Consider = {σ k k 1}. Note that any finite subset of is satisfiable. (Take a model of sufficiently large to satisfy the finite σ k s.) According to the Compactness Theorem, is satisfiable. Let M be a model of. M = σ k for all k 1, so M cannot be finite. Corollary Finiteness is not FO definable. (There exists no set of FO sentences satisfied precisely by models that are finite). Proposition Graph connectivity is not FO definable. Proof: Suppose σ defines connectivity. Let a, b be constants. Define σ k x 1 x 2 x k (E(a, x 1 ) E(x 1, x 2 ) E(x k, b)), (where E is the binary predicated that defines edges). In other words, σ k says that the distance between a and b is greater than k. Consider = {σ} {σ k k 1}. Every finite subset of is satisfiable (by a connected graph with a long enough shortest path between a and b). By the Compactness Theorem, is satisfiable. Let G be a model of. Then distance(a, b) > k for every k 1, so there is no path from a to b in G. This contradicts the fact that G is connected. 14
Herbrand 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 informationSyntax. Notation Throughout, and when not otherwise said, we assume a vocabulary V = C F P.
First-Order Logic Syntax The alphabet of a first-order language is organised into the following categories. Logical connectives:,,,,, and. Auxiliary symbols:.,,, ( and ). Variables: we assume a countable
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 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 informationGödel s Completeness Theorem
A.Miller M571 Spring 2002 Gödel s Completeness Theorem We only consider countable languages L for first order logic with equality which have only predicate symbols and constant symbols. We regard the symbols
More informationFirst Order Logic (FOL) 1 znj/dm2017
First Order Logic (FOL) 1 http://lcs.ios.ac.cn/ znj/dm2017 Naijun Zhan March 19, 2017 1 Special thanks to Profs Hanpin Wang (PKU) and Lijun Zhang (ISCAS) for their courtesy of the slides on this course.
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 informationFirst Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics
CS1081 First Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics COMP30412 Sean Bechhofer sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk Problems Propositional logic isn t very expressive As an example, consider p = Scotland won on Saturday
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 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 informationLecture 2: Syntax. January 24, 2018
Lecture 2: Syntax January 24, 2018 We now review the basic definitions of first-order logic in more detail. Recall that a language consists of a collection of symbols {P i }, each of which has some specified
More informationif t 1,...,t k Terms and P k is a k-ary predicate, then P k (t 1,...,t k ) Formulas (atomic formulas)
FOL Query Evaluation Giuseppe De Giacomo Università di Roma La Sapienza Corso di Seminari di Ingegneria del Software: Data and Service Integration Laurea Specialistica in Ingegneria Informatica Università
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 informationChapter 3: Propositional Calculus: Deductive Systems. September 19, 2008
Chapter 3: Propositional Calculus: Deductive Systems September 19, 2008 Outline 1 3.1 Deductive (Proof) System 2 3.2 Gentzen System G 3 3.3 Hilbert System H 4 3.4 Soundness and Completeness; Consistency
More information1 Completeness Theorem for Classical Predicate
1 Completeness Theorem for Classical Predicate Logic The relationship between the first order models defined in terms of structures M = [M, I] and valuations s : V AR M and propositional models defined
More informationCharacterizing First Order Logic
Characterizing First Order Logic Jared Holshouser, Originally by Lindstrom September 16, 2014 We are following the presentation of Chang and Keisler. 1 A Brief Review of First Order Logic Definition 1.
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 informationCMPS 217 Logic in Computer Science. Lecture #17
CMPS 217 Logic in Computer Science https://courses.soe.ucsc.edu/courses/cmps217/spring13/01 Lecture #17 1 The Complexity of FO-Truth on a Structure Structure A Complexity of Th(A) Structure of the natural
More information06 From Propositional to Predicate Logic
Martin Henz February 19, 2014 Generated on Wednesday 19 th February, 2014, 09:48 1 Syntax of Predicate Logic 2 3 4 5 6 Need for Richer Language Predicates Variables Functions 1 Syntax of Predicate Logic
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 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 information1 Completeness Theorem for First Order Logic
1 Completeness Theorem for First Order Logic There are many proofs of the Completeness Theorem for First Order Logic. We follow here a version of Henkin s proof, as presented in the Handbook of Mathematical
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 informationClassical First-Order Logic
Classical First-Order Logic Software Formal Verification Maria João Frade Departmento de Informática Universidade do Minho 2009/2010 Maria João Frade (DI-UM) First-Order Logic (Classical) MFES 2009/10
More informationGÖDEL S COMPLETENESS AND INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS. Contents 1. Introduction Gödel s Completeness Theorem
GÖDEL S COMPLETENESS AND INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS BEN CHAIKEN Abstract. This paper will discuss the completeness and incompleteness theorems of Kurt Gödel. These theorems have a profound impact on the philosophical
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 informationRelations to first order logic
An Introduction to Description Logic IV Relations to first order logic Marco Cerami Palacký University in Olomouc Department of Computer Science Olomouc, Czech Republic Olomouc, November 6 th 2014 Marco
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 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 informationOverview of Topics. Finite Model Theory. Finite Model Theory. Connections to Database Theory. Qing Wang
Overview of Topics Finite Model Theory Part 1: Introduction 1 What is finite model theory? 2 Connections to some areas in CS Qing Wang qing.wang@anu.edu.au Database theory Complexity theory 3 Basic definitions
More informationLogic Michælmas 2003
Logic Michælmas 2003 ii Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Propositional logic 3 3 Syntactic implication 5 3.0.1 Two consequences of completeness.............. 7 4 Posets and Zorn s lemma 9 5 Predicate logic
More informationFinal Exam (100 points)
Final Exam (100 points) Honor Code: Each question is worth 10 points. There is one bonus question worth 5 points. In contrast to the homework assignments, you may not collaborate on this final exam. You
More informationFinite Model Theory Unit 1
Finite Model Theory Unit 1 Dan Suciu Spring 2018 Dan Suciu Finite Model Theory Unit 1 Spring 2018 1 / 80 Welcome to 599c: Finite Model Theory Logic is the foundation of Mathematics (see Logicomix). Logic
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 informationNotes on Satisfiability-Based Problem Solving. First Order Logic. David Mitchell October 23, 2013
Notes on Satisfiability-Based Problem Solving First Order Logic David Mitchell mitchell@cs.sfu.ca October 23, 2013 Preliminary draft. Please do not distribute. Corrections and suggestions welcome. In this
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 information1 First-order logic. 1 Syntax of first-order logic. 2 Semantics of first-order logic. 3 First-order logic queries. 2 First-order query evaluation
Knowledge Bases and Databases Part 1: First-Order Queries Diego Calvanese Faculty of Computer Science Master of Science in Computer Science A.Y. 2007/2008 Overview of Part 1: First-order queries 1 First-order
More informationFriendly Logics, Fall 2015, Lecture Notes 1
Friendly Logics, Fall 2015, Lecture Notes 1 Val Tannen 1 Some references Course Web Page: http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~val/cis682. I have posted there the remarkable On the Unusual Effectiveness of Logic
More informationFriendly Logics, Fall 2015, Lecture Notes 5
Friendly Logics, Fall 2015, Lecture Notes 5 Val Tannen 1 FO definability In these lecture notes we restrict attention to relational vocabularies i.e., vocabularies consisting only of relation symbols (or
More informationContents 1. Examples of structures A. Graphs B. Partial and linear orderings C. Fields D. The natural numbers...
THE LOWER PREDICATE CALCULUS WITH IDENTITY, LPCI Contents 1. Examples of structures........................................ 2 1A. Graphs................................................ 2 1B. Partial and
More informationPropositional and Predicate Logic - VII
Propositional and Predicate Logic - VII Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK WS 2015/2016 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - VII WS 2015/2016 1 / 11 Theory Validity in a theory A theory
More informationVAUGHT S THEOREM: THE FINITE SPECTRUM OF COMPLETE THEORIES IN ℵ 0. Contents
VAUGHT S THEOREM: THE FINITE SPECTRUM OF COMPLETE THEORIES IN ℵ 0 BENJAMIN LEDEAUX Abstract. This expository paper introduces model theory with a focus on countable models of complete theories. Vaught
More informationAll psychiatrists are doctors All doctors are college graduates All psychiatrists are college graduates
Predicate Logic In what we ve discussed thus far, we haven t addressed other kinds of valid inferences: those involving quantification and predication. For example: All philosophers are wise Socrates is
More information185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic
185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic www.volny.cz/behounek/logic/teaching/mathlog13 Libor Běhounek, behounek@cs.cas.cz Lecture #1, October 15, 2013 Organizational matters Study materials will be posted
More information6c Lecture 14: May 14, 2014
6c Lecture 14: May 14, 2014 11 Compactness We begin with a consequence of the completeness theorem. Suppose T is a theory. Recall that T is satisfiable if there is a model M T of T. Recall that T is consistent
More informationPreliminaries. Introduction to EF-games. Inexpressivity results for first-order logic. Normal forms for first-order logic
Introduction to EF-games Inexpressivity results for first-order logic Normal forms for first-order logic Algorithms and complexity for specific classes of structures General complexity bounds Preliminaries
More informationLogic for Computer Scientists
Logic for Computer Scientists Pascal Hitzler http://www.pascal-hitzler.de CS 499/699 Lecture, Winter Quarter 2011 Wright State University, Dayton, OH, U.S.A. [final version: 03/10/2011] Contents 1 Propositional
More informationCSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Definitions
CSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Definitions Department of Computer Sciences College of Engineering Florida Tech Fall 2011 Arithmetic 1 Alphabets, Strings, Languages, & Words 2 Number Systems 3 Machine
More informationCMPSCI 601: Tarski s Truth Definition Lecture 15. where
@ CMPSCI 601: Tarski s Truth Definition Lecture 15! "$#&%(') *+,-!".#/%0'!12 43 5 6 7 8:9 4; 9 9 < = 9 = or 5 6?>A@B!9 2 D for all C @B 9 CFE where ) CGE @B-HI LJKK MKK )HG if H ; C if H @ 1 > > > Fitch
More informationAn Introduction to Modal Logic III
An Introduction to Modal Logic III Soundness of Normal Modal Logics Marco Cerami Palacký University in Olomouc Department of Computer Science Olomouc, Czech Republic Olomouc, October 24 th 2013 Marco Cerami
More informationLecture 11: Gödel s Second Incompleteness Theorem, and Tarski s Theorem
Lecture 11: Gödel s Second Incompleteness Theorem, and Tarski s Theorem Valentine Kabanets October 27, 2016 1 Gödel s Second Incompleteness Theorem 1.1 Consistency We say that a proof system P is consistent
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 informationPart II. Logic and Set Theory. Year
Part II Year 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2018 60 Paper 4, Section II 16G State and prove the ǫ-recursion Theorem. [You may assume the Principle of ǫ- Induction.]
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 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 informationPREDICATE LOGIC: UNDECIDABILITY AND INCOMPLETENESS HUTH AND RYAN 2.5, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 2
PREDICATE LOGIC: UNDECIDABILITY AND INCOMPLETENESS HUTH AND RYAN 2.5, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 2 Neil D. Jones DIKU 2005 14 September, 2005 Some slides today new, some based on logic 2004 (Nils Andersen) OUTLINE,
More informationCONTENTS. Appendix C: Gothic Alphabet 109
Contents 1 Sentential Logic 1 1.1 Introduction............................ 1 1.2 Sentences of Sentential Logic................... 2 1.3 Truth Assignments........................ 7 1.4 Logical Consequence.......................
More informationTecniche di Verifica. Introduction to Propositional Logic
Tecniche di Verifica Introduction to Propositional Logic 1 Logic A formal logic is defined by its syntax and semantics. Syntax An alphabet is a set of symbols. A finite sequence of these symbols is called
More informationExamples: P: it is not the case that P. P Q: P or Q P Q: P implies Q (if P then Q) Typical formula:
Logic: The Big Picture 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
More informationLecture 13: Soundness, Completeness and Compactness
Discrete Mathematics (II) Spring 2017 Lecture 13: Soundness, Completeness and Compactness Lecturer: Yi Li 1 Overview In this lecture, we will prvoe the soundness and completeness of tableau proof system,
More informationAbstract model theory for extensions of modal logic
Abstract model theory for extensions of modal logic Balder ten Cate Stanford, May 13, 2008 Largely based on joint work with Johan van Benthem and Jouko Väänänen Balder ten Cate Abstract model theory for
More informationNotes on Propositional and First-Order Logic (CPSC 229 Class Notes, January )
Notes on Propositional and First-Order Logic (CPSC 229 Class Notes, January 23 30 2017) John Lasseter Revised February 14, 2017 The following notes are a record of the class sessions we ve devoted to the
More informationChapter 3. Formal Number Theory
Chapter 3. Formal Number Theory 1. An Axiom System for Peano Arithmetic (S) The language L A of Peano arithmetic has a constant 0, a unary function symbol, a binary function symbol +, binary function symbol,
More informationSome consequences of compactness in Lukasiewicz Predicate Logic
Some consequences of compactness in Lukasiewicz Predicate Logic Luca Spada Department of Mathematics and Computer Science University of Salerno www.logica.dmi.unisa.it/lucaspada 7 th Panhellenic Logic
More informationComputational Logic. Recall of First-Order Logic. Damiano Zanardini
Computational Logic Recall of First-Order Logic Damiano Zanardini UPM European Master in Computational Logic (EMCL) School of Computer Science Technical University of Madrid damiano@fi.upm.es Academic
More informationLINDSTRÖM S THEOREM SALMAN SIDDIQI
LINDSTRÖM S THEOREM SALMAN SIDDIQI Abstract. This paper attempts to serve as an introduction to abstract model theory. We introduce the notion of abstract logics, explore first-order logic as an instance
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 informationVictoria Gitman and Thomas Johnstone. New York City College of Technology, CUNY
Gödel s Proof Victoria Gitman and Thomas Johnstone New York City College of Technology, CUNY vgitman@nylogic.org http://websupport1.citytech.cuny.edu/faculty/vgitman tjohnstone@citytech.cuny.edu March
More informationAlgebraizing Hybrid Logic. Evangelos Tzanis University of Amsterdam Institute of Logic, Language and Computation
Algebraizing Hybrid Logic Evangelos Tzanis University of Amsterdam Institute of Logic, Language and Computation etzanis@science.uva.nl May 1, 2005 2 Contents 1 Introduction 5 1.1 A guide to this thesis..........................
More informationLogic for Computer Scientists
Logic for Computer Scientists Pascal Hitzler http://www.pascal-hitzler.de CS 499/699 Lecture, Spring Quarter 2010 Wright State University, Dayton, OH, U.S.A. Final version. Contents 1 Propositional Logic
More informationBasics of Model Theory
Chapter udf Basics of Model Theory bas.1 Reducts and Expansions mod:bas:red: defn:reduct mod:bas:red: prop:reduct Often it is useful or necessary to compare languages which have symbols in common, as well
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 information22c:145 Artificial Intelligence. First-Order Logic. Readings: Chapter 8 of Russell & Norvig.
22c:145 Artificial Intelligence First-Order Logic Readings: Chapter 8 of Russell & Norvig. Einstein s Puzzle in Logic We used propositinal variables to specify everything: x 1 = house #1 is red ; x 2 =
More informationBetween proof theory and model theory Three traditions in logic: Syntactic (formal deduction)
Overview Between proof theory and model theory Three traditions in logic: Syntactic (formal deduction) Jeremy Avigad Department of Philosophy Carnegie Mellon University avigad@cmu.edu http://andrew.cmu.edu/
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 informationThe Language. Elementary Logic. Outline. Well-Formed Formulae (wff s)
The Language Elementary Logic Bow-Yaw Wang Institute of Information Science Academia Sinica, Taiwan July 1, 2009 The following symbols are used in sentential logic Symbol Name Remark ( left parenthesis
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 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 informationPart II Logic and Set Theory
Part II Logic and Set Theory Theorems Based on lectures by I. B. Leader Notes taken by Dexter Chua Lent 2015 These notes are not endorsed by the lecturers, and I have modified them (often significantly)
More informationOverview. CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning. Lecture 7: Validity Proofs and Properties of FOL. Motivation for semantic argument method
Overview CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning Lecture 7: Validity Proofs and Properties of FOL Agenda for today: Semantic argument method for proving FOL validity Işıl Dillig Important properties of FOL
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 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 information07 Equational Logic and Algebraic Reasoning
CAS 701 Fall 2004 07 Equational Logic and Algebraic Reasoning Instructor: W. M. Farmer Revised: 17 November 2004 1 What is Equational Logic? Equational logic is first-order logic restricted to languages
More informationLogic: Propositional Logic Truth Tables
Logic: Propositional Logic Truth Tables Raffaella Bernardi bernardi@inf.unibz.it P.zza Domenicani 3, Room 2.28 Faculty of Computer Science, Free University of Bolzano-Bozen http://www.inf.unibz.it/~bernardi/courses/logic06
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 informationMathematical Logic. An Introduction
Mathematical Logic. An Introduction Summer 2006 by Peter Koepke Table of contents Table of contents............................................... 1 1 Introduction.................................................
More informationMarie Duží
Marie Duží marie.duzi@vsb.cz 1 Formal systems, Proof calculi A proof calculus (of a theory) is given by: 1. a language 2. a set of axioms 3. a set of deduction rules ad 1. The definition of a language
More informationIntroduction to Model Theory
Introduction to Model Theory Charles Steinhorn, Vassar College Katrin Tent, University of Münster CIRM, January 8, 2018 The three lectures Introduction to basic model theory Focus on Definability More
More informationAAA615: Formal Methods. Lecture 2 First-Order Logic
AAA615: Formal Methods Lecture 2 First-Order Logic Hakjoo Oh 2017 Fall Hakjoo Oh AAA615 2017 Fall, Lecture 2 September 24, 2017 1 / 29 First-Order Logic An extension of propositional logic with predicates,
More informationINSTITUTE OF MATHEMATICS THE CZECH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Incompleteness in the finite domain. Pavel Pudlák
INSTITUTE OF MATHEMATICS THE CZECH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Incompleteness in the finite domain Pavel Pudlák Preprint No. 5-2016 PRAHA 2016 Incompleteness in the finite domain Pavel Pudlák January 7, 2016
More information1 FUNDAMENTALS OF LOGIC NO.10 HERBRAND THEOREM Tatsuya Hagino hagino@sfc.keio.ac.jp lecture URL https://vu5.sfc.keio.ac.jp/slide/ 2 So Far Propositional Logic Logical connectives (,,, ) Truth table Tautology
More informationFrom Constructibility and Absoluteness to Computability and Domain Independence
From Constructibility and Absoluteness to Computability and Domain Independence Arnon Avron School of Computer Science Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel aa@math.tau.ac.il Abstract. Gödel s main
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 informationMODEL THEORY FOR ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY
MODEL THEORY FOR ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY VICTOR ZHANG Abstract. We demonstrate how several problems of algebraic geometry, i.e. Ax-Grothendieck, Hilbert s Nullstellensatz, Noether- Ostrowski, and Hilbert s
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 informationMATH 770 : Foundations of Mathematics. Fall Itay Ben-Yaacov
MATH 770 : Foundations of Mathematics Fall 2005 Itay Ben-Yaacov Itay Ben-Yaacov, University of Wisconsin Madison, Department of Mathematics, 480 Lincoln Drive, Madison, WI 53706-1388, USA URL: http://www.math.wisc.edu/~pezz
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 informationThe predicate calculus is complete
The predicate calculus is complete Hans Halvorson The first thing we need to do is to precisify the inference rules UI and EE. To this end, we will use A(c) to denote a sentence containing the name c,
More informationCS 2800: Logic and Computation Fall 2010 (Lecture 13)
CS 2800: Logic and Computation Fall 2010 (Lecture 13) 13 October 2010 1 An Introduction to First-order Logic In Propositional(Boolean) Logic, we used large portions of mathematical language, namely those
More informationFuzzy Does Not Lie! Can BAŞKENT. 20 January 2006 Akçay, Göttingen, Amsterdam Student No:
Fuzzy Does Not Lie! Can BAŞKENT 20 January 2006 Akçay, Göttingen, Amsterdam canbaskent@yahoo.com, www.geocities.com/canbaskent Student No: 0534390 Three-valued logic, end of the critical rationality. Imre
More information