1. Propositional Calculus

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "1. Propositional Calculus"

Transcription

1 1. Propositional Calculus Some notes for Math 601, Fall 2010 based on Elliott Mendelson, Introduction to Mathematical Logic, Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall. 2. Syntax ( grammar ). 1.1, p. 1. Given: a set S = {S 1, S 2, } of statement letters or propositional variables. In the book, it is assumed that S is a countable infinite set (i.e., there are as many elements of S as natural numbers). Everything that follows holds even if S is finite or uncountable. Assume that {,,,, } is a 5-element set disjoint from S: S {,,,, } =. The elements of {,,,, } are called propositional connectives. They will also be used as symbols denoting particular operations on sets. Ordered pairs x, y and ordered triples (see p. xix) are defined thus (pp. 231): For any sets x and y let x, y = {{x}, {x, y}}, x, y, z = x, y, z = {{{{x}, {x, y}}}, {{{x}, {x, y}}, z}}. x y =, x, y, x y =, x, y, x y =, x, y, x y =, x, y, x =, x. Assume S contains no ordered pairs. Let Sent be the closure of S under the operations,,,, and. Then Sent,,,,, is an algebra called the sentence algebra, Sent itself is the called the set of sentences or formulas (in the book, statement forms ) built from S, and Sent is the language of propositional calculus. The essential properties of the sentence algebra are as follows: Theorem 1. For every set S that contains no ordered pairs there exists a set Sent with the following properties: (1) S Sent. (2) Sent is closed under the operations,,,, and defined above. (3) Let A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J Sent. Then (a) A B, C D, E F, G H, and J are not in S. (b) A B, C D, E F, G H, and J are all different from each other. (c) If A B = C D then A = C and B = D. (d) If A B = C D then A = C and B = D (e) If A B = C D then A = C and B = D. (f) If A B = C D then A = C and B = D. (g) If A = B then A = B. (4) Sent is the intersection of all sets that contain S and are closed under,,,, and : Sent = {X : S X and if A, B X, then A B, A B, A B, A B, A X}. Theorem 2 (principle of induction for Sent). If S X and X is closed under,,,, and, then Sent X. 1

2 2 Theorem 3 ( unique readability for Sent). If A Sent, then exactly one of the following statements holds: (1) A S, (2) A = B C for some B, C Sent, (3) A = B C for some B, C Sent, (4) A = B C for some B, C Sent, (5) A = B C for some B, C Sent, (6) A = B for some B Sent. The book constructs statements by a method that involves some notational difficulties: see footnotes, p. 1, and read Parentheses in 1.2., pp Semantics ( meanings ). 1.1, pp Let {T, F} be a set of two truth values, where T F. Define five operations on {T, F} as follows. T F T F + T F T F T T T F T T F T T T T T F T F F T T F F F F T F F F T F T Then {T, F},,, +,, is an algebra called the truth-value algebra. Definition 4. A valuation is a homomorphism from the sentence algebra Sent,,,,, into the truth-value algebra. Theorem 5. For every function f : S {T, F} there is a unique valuation v extending f. This means that for all A, B Sent, (1) v(a) = f(a) if A S, i.e., v extends f, (2) v(a B) = v(a) v(b), (3) v(a B) = v(a) v(b), (4) v(a B) = v(a) + v(b), (5) v(a B) = v(a) v(b), (6) v( A) = v(a). Proof. To show that there can be at most one such extension, suppose that v and v are extensions of f satisfying (1) (6). Let X = {A : A Sent and v (A) = v (A)}. We will show that S X and X is closed under,,,, and. Since X Sent, it then follows that X = Sent, hence v = v. To see that S X, assume A S. Then v (A) = f(a) and v (A) = f(a) by (1), hence v (A) = v (A). Thus A X. Assume A, B X. Then A B X because v (A B) = v (A) v (B) by (2) for v = v (A) v (B) since A, B X = v (A B) by (2) for v Similar calculations show that A B X, A B X, A B X, and A X. Thus X is closed under,,,, and. To show the existence of v we use Zorn s Lemma [Prop. 4.42(e), p. 279]. Say that a function w : dom(w) {T, F} is f-acceptable if

3 (a) S dom(w) Sent, (b) w(a) = f(a) for every A S, i.e., w extends f, (c) if A B dom(w) then A, B dom(w) and w(a B) = w(a) w(b), (d) if A B dom(w) then A, B dom(w) and w(a B) = w(a) w(b), (e) if A B dom(w) then A, B dom(w) and w(a B) = w(a) + w(b), (f) if A B dom(w) then A, B dom(w) and w(a B) = w(a) w(b), (g) if A dom(w) then A dom(w) and w( A) = w(a). Let be the set of f-acceptable functions. is partially ordered by the inclusion relation. A chain is a subset C such that if v, v C then either v v or v v. We show below that the union of a chain of f-acceptable functions is f-acceptable. The union of a chain is trivially an upper bound with respect to inclusion, so this will show that every chain in has an upper bound in. Claim 1. f is f-acceptable, i.e. f. Proof. The domain of f is S, so (a) holds. Clearly (b) holds. The hypotheses of (c) (g) are always false by Theorem 1(3)(a), so (c) (g) hold as well. Claim 2. The union of every chain C is in. Proof. Let w = C. We will show w is f-acceptable. First we show w is a function. Let A, t 0, A, t 1 w. We must show t 0 = t 1. From A, t 0 w = C we get A, t 0 v for some v C, and, similarly, A, t 1 v for some v C. Since C is a chain, either v v or v v. In the first case, v v, we have A, t 0, A, t 1 v, hence t 0 = t 1 since v is a function. In the second case, v v, we have A, t 0, A, t 1 v, hence t 0 = t 1 since v is a function. Since w is the union of functions with values in {T, F}, its values must also be in {T, F}. Thus we know w : dom(w) {T, F}. Since w is the union of functions defined on all of S, w is also defined on all of S. Since w is the union of functions whose domains are sets of formulas, the domain of w is also a set of formulas. Thus (a) holds for w. Next we prove (c) for w. Note that dom(w) = u C dom(u). Assume A B dom(w). Then A B dom(u) for some u C. But u is f-acceptable, so (c) holds for u, hence A, B dom(u) and u(a B) = u(a) u(b). Since w is a function extending u, we have u(a B) = w(a B), u(a) = w(a), and u(b) = w(b). Combining these equations yields w(a B) = w(a) w(b). The proofs of (d) (g) for w are similar. Claim 3. has a maximal element. Call it v. Proof. By Claim 2 and Zorn s Lemma [Prop. 4.42(e), p. 279]. Claim 4. The domain of v is Sent. Proof. By Claim 3, v. Hence dom(v) Sent by (a). We prove the opposite inclusion by induction. So we wish to prove S dom(v) and dom(v) is closed under the operations on formulas. We have S dom(v) by (a), since v. Claim 5. dom(v) is closed under. Proof. Assume A, B dom(v). We wish to show A B dom(v). Assume, to the contrary, that A B / dom(v). Let w = v { A B, v(a) v(b) }. We will prove that w. But this will contradict the maximality of v, since v w but v w, thus proving that the assumption was wrong, hence A B dom(v). First note that w is a function because the single additional pair that is in w but not in v begins with a formula that is not in the domain of v. 3

4 4 From v and (a) we get S dom(v) Sent, and we have A B Sent. Consequently S dom(v) {A B} = dom(w) Sent, so (a) holds for w. If C S, then v(c) = f(c) by (b) for v. But w is a function extending v, so w(c) = f(c) as well. Thus (b) holds for w. Now we prove (c) for w. Assume C D dom(w). Then either C D dom(v) or else C D = A B. First case: C D dom(v). By (c) for v we get C, D dom(v) and v(c D) = v(c) v(d). Since w extends v, we have C, D, C D dom(w), v(c D) = w(c D), v(c) = w(c), and v(d) = w(d). Therefore w(c D) = w(c) w(d), as desired. So (c) holds in the first case. Second case: C D = A B. By property (3)(iii) of Sent, we get C = A and D = B. But we assumed A, B dom(v), so C, D dom(v) dom(w) and w(c D) = w(a B) = v(a) v(b). So (c) holds in the second case. Now we prove (d) for w. Assume C D dom(w). Then, by the definition of w, either C D dom(v) or else C D = A B. But the second possibility cannot occur, according to property (3)(ii) of Sent. Hence C D dom(v). By (d) for v we get C, D dom(v) w and v(c D) = v(c) v(d), hence, since w extends v, w(c D) = w(c) w(d). Similarly, (e), (f), and (g) hold for w. This completes the proof of Claim 5 that dom(v) is closed under. Similar proofs show that dom(v) is also closed under,, and. Since dom(v) contains S and is closed under,,, and, we conclude that Sent dom(v). But dom(v) Sent by (a) since v. Therefore dom(v) = Sent. P(S) is the set of all subsets of S, and is called the powerset of S. The next theorem proves the existence of a function st such that st(a) is the set of statement letters occurring in A. Theorem 6. There exists a unique map st : Sent P(S) such that (1) st(a) = {A} if A S, (2) st(a B) = st(a B) = st(a B) = st(a B) = st(a) st(b), (3) st( A) = st(a). Proof. There was nothing in the proof of Theorem 5 that depended on the exact nature of the set {T, F}, so {T, F} can be replaced with P(S), and other parts of the proof can be appropriately changed. The next two theorems have similar inductive proofs. Theorem 7. For every A Sent, st(a) is finite, i.e., st(a) < ω. Theorem 8. If B Sent, and v, w are valuations with w(a) = v(a) for every A st(b), then w(b) = v(b). By the next theorem, there is a function sf such that sf(a) is the set of subformulas of A. Theorem 9. There exists a unique map sf : Sent P(S) such that (1) sf(a) = {A} if A S, (2) sf(a B) = sf(a) sf(b) {A B}, (3) sf(a B) = sf(a) sf(b) {A B}, (4) sf(a B) = sf(a) sf(b) {A B}, (5) sf(a B) = sf(a) sf(b) {A B},

5 5 (6) sf( A) = sf(a) { A}. Definition 10. Let A, B Sent and Γ Sent. 4. Tautologies (1) A is a tautology if v(a) = T for every valuation v. (2) A is a contradiction if v(a) = F for every valuation v. (3) A is logically equivalent to B, in symbols, A B, if v(a) = v(b) for every valuation v. (4) Γ logically implies A, and A is a logical consequence of Γ, in symbols, Γ = A, if v(a) = T for every valuation v with the property that v(g) = T for every G Γ. Write B = A instead of {B} = A, B, C = A instead of {B, C} = A, = A instead of = A. Note that = A iff A is a tautology. Theorem 11. There is an algorithm for determining whether a sentence A is a tautology. Proof. The truth-table method is such an algorithm. The previous theorems show that the only values of a valuation v that contribute to the value of v(a) are the values of v on the variables in st(a), and st(a) is finite, so there are only 2 st(a) cases to check to see whether v(a) = T for all valuations v. Theorem 12 (Prop. 1.1). Let A, B Sent. (1) A = B iff A B is a tautology. (2) A B iff A B is a tautology. Proof. Note first that v(a B) = T iff v(a) = v(b). The result follows from this observation and the relevant definitions. For a proof of the second part is suffices to observe that the following statements are equivalent: A B, for all v, v(a) = v(b), for all v, v(a) v(b) = T, for all v, v(a B) = T. Prop. 1.2: modus ponens is sound. Prop. 1.3: Substitution into a tautology produces a tautology. Prop. 1.4: Substitution into equivalent statements yields equivalent statements. 5. Adequate Sets of Connectives Prop. 1.5:,, generate all truth functions. Prop. 1.6: Adequate sets are {, }, {, }, and {, }. 6. Axioms and proofs, 1.4. Now we assume that Sent is built up from the set S using only the operations and. We no longer have the fundamental operations,, and, which are introduced instead by the following definitions. A B := A B,

6 6 Definition 13. A B := (A B), A B := ((A B) (B A)). (A1) := {A (B A) : A, B Sent}, (A2) := {(A (B C)) ((A B) (A C)) : A, B, C Sent}, (A3) := {( B A) (( B A) B) : A, B Sent}, (A1)(A2) := (A1) (A2), (A1)(A2)(A3) := (A1) (A2) (A3). Theorem 14. If A (A1)(A2)(A3) then A is a tautology. Definition 15. Let Γ, Sent, and A Sent. Then Γ A if there is a finite sequence B 1,..., B n of sentences of length n ω such that (1) B n = A, (2) for every i {1,..., n}, either (a) B i or (b) B i Γ or (c) there are j, k {1,..., i 1} such that B k = B j B i. The sequence B 1,..., B n is called a proof of A from hypotheses Γ using axioms. A less formal definition of proof is that it a sequence of formulas in which every formula is either a hypothesis or an axiom or is obtained from two previous formulas by modus ponens (MP), where the axioms and rule MP are (A1) A (B A) (A2) (A (B A)) ((A B) (A C)) (A3) ( B A) (( B A) B) A, A B MP B A set of formulas Ω Sent is MP-closed iff C Ω whenever B, C Sent and B, B C Ω. The principle of induction on provability is Theorem 16. Γ A iff A {Ω : Γ Ω and Ω is MP-closed}. Definition 17. Let Γ Sent and A Sent. (1) Γ A iff Γ (A1)(A2)(A3) A, (2) Γ d A iff Γ (A1)(A2) A. Lemma 18. (See Lemma 1.8) d A A for every A Sent. Proof. Let B 1 = A ((A A) A), B 2 = (A ((A A) A)) ((A (A A)) (A A)), B 3 = (A (A A)) (A A), B 4 = A (A A), B 5 = A A. Then B 1, B 2, B 3, B 4, B 5 is a proof of A A from using (A1)(A2), since B i i = 1,..., 5, B 1 (A1), B 2 (A2), B 2 = B 1 B 3, B 4 (A1), and B 3 = B 4 B 5. Sent for

7 7 7. Soundness, 1.4. Theorem 19. If Γ A and B is a tautology for every B, then Γ = A. Proof. Assume Γ A. Then there is a proof B 1,..., B n of A from Γ using. Claim. Γ = B i whenever 1 i n. The claim is proved by induction on i. Suppose i = 1. Then there are no previous formulas in the sequence, so B 1 must be in Γ. If B 1 Γ then we get Γ = B 1 immediately from the definition of =. If B 1 then B 1 is a tautology by hypothesis, hence = B 1, hence Γ = B 1. Thus the Claim holds when i = 1. Assume Γ = B 1,..., Γ = B i 1. We wish to show that Γ = B i. If B i Γ, then either B i, B i is a tautology by hypothesis so Γ = B i, or else B i Γ and Γ = B i. Suppose B i is obtained from previous formulas by modus ponens. Then there are j, k < i such that B k = (B j B i ). By the inductive hypothesis, Γ = B j and Γ = B j B i. Consider an arbitrary valuation v such that v(c) = T for every C Γ. Then v(b j ) = T since Γ = B j, and v(b j B i ) = v(b j ) v(b i ) = T since Γ = B j B i. But the equations v(b j ) = T and v(b j ) v(b i ) = T imply v(b i ) = T by the definition of. This shows that Γ = B i. Corollary 20. If Γ A and B is a tautology for every B Γ, then A is also a tautology. Corollary 21 (Prop. 1.12, Weak Soundness). If A then A is a tautology. 8. Properties of provability, 1.4. The next six theorems are the fundamental properties of provability (see p. 26). Theorem 22 (weakening). If Γ Γ and Γ A then Γ A. Theorem 23 (weakening). If and Γ A then Γ A. Theorem 24 (reiteration). If A Γ, then Γ A. Theorem 25 (MP-lemma). If Γ A and Γ A B then Γ B. Theorem 26 (compactness). If Γ A then Γ A for some finite subsets Γ Γ and. Theorem 27 (transitivity). If Γ B for every B Γ and Γ A, then Γ A. 9. The Deduction Theorem, 1.4. Theorem 28 (Deduction Theorem; see Prop. 1.9). Let A, B Sent and Γ Sent. Then Γ, A d B iff Γ d A B. Proof. Assume Γ d A B. Then Γ, A d A B by weakening (Th 22), and Γ, A d A by reiteration (Th 24). Hence Γ, A d B by the MP-lemma (Th 25). For the converse, assume Γ, A d B. Then there is a proof C 1,..., C n of B from Γ {A} using (A1)(A2). Claim. Γ d A C i whenever 1 i n. Proof. The claim is proved by induction on i. Case: i = 1. We need to show Γ d A C 1. Subcase: C 1 Γ (A1)(A2). Then C 1, C 1 (A C 1 ), A C 1 is a proof of A C 1 from Γ using (A1), so Γ d A C 1.

8 8 Subcase: C 1 arises via MP. This case can t occur because there are no previous formulas. Subcase: C 1 = A. Then Γ d A C 1 by Lemma 18. Case: 1 < i n. Assume Γ d A C j for j {1,..., i 1}. We want to show Γ d A C i. Subcase: C i Γ (A1)(A2). Then C i, C i (A C i ), A C i is a proof of A C i from Γ using (A1)(A2), so Γ d A C i. Subcase: C i = A. Then d A C i by Lemma 18. Subcase: there are j, k {1,..., i 1} such that C k = C j C i. By assumption we have Γ d A C j and Γ d A C k. The latter fact, restated, says that Γ d A (C j C i ). Hence there is a proof B 1,..., B r of A C j from Γ using (A1)(A2), and there is a proof C 1,..., C s of A (C j C i )) from Γ using (A1)(A2). Then the following sequence of formulas is a proof of A C i from Γ using (A1)(A2). B 1. B r 1 A C j D 1. D s 1 proof of A C j from Γ A (C j C i )) proof of A (C j C i )) from Γ (A (C j C i )) ((A C j ) (A C i )) (A2) (A C j ) (A C i ) MP A C i The next theorem follows from the properties of provability and the Deduction Theorem. Theorem 29 (see Cor. 1.10). Let A, B, C Sent. Then (1) d A (B A), (2) d A ((A B) B), (3) d (A (B C)) (B (A C)), (4) d (A B) ((A (B C)) (A C)), (5) d A ((A B) ((A (B C)) C)), (6) d (A B) ((B C) (A C)), (7) A B, B C d A C, (8) B, A (B C) d A C. 10. Completeness Theorem for Propositional Calculus of and Definition 30. For every valuation v and every A Sent, let { A v A if v(a) = T = A if v(a) = F Lemma 31. Assume v is a valuation and A is a sentence built up from sentence letters S 1,..., S n. Let (v) = {S v 1,..., S v n}. Then (v) A v, i.e., ( ) If v(a) = T then (v) A and if v(a) = F then (v) A. MP

9 9 Proof. The proof is by induction on the complexity of A. The boxed formulas are lemmas that need to be proved. (1) Suppose A is a statement letter, say A = S i. If v(a) = T then v(s i ) = T, hence A = S i = S v i (v), hence (v) A. If v(a) = F then v(s i ) = F, hence A = S i = S v i (v), hence (v) A. (2) Suppose A = B, and ( ) holds for B. If v(a) = T = v( B) then v(b) = F, so by ( ), (v) B, hence (v) A. If v(a) = F = v( B) then v(b) = T, so by ( ), (v) B, hence (v) B since B B, hence (v) A. (3) Suppose A = (B C), and ( ) holds for B and C. If v(a) = T = v(b C) then either v(c) = T, so by ( ), (v) C, hence (v) A since C B C, or else v(b) = F, so by ( ), (v) B, hence (v) A since B B C. If v(a) = F = v(b C) then v(b) = T and v(c) = F, so by ( ), (v) B and (v) C, hence (v) A since B, C (B C). Theorem 32 (Weak Completeness). If = A then A. Proof. Assume = A. Note that A v = A for every v, since we are assuming that A is a tautology. Claim. If i {1,..., n + 1}, then S v i, S v i+1,..., S v n A for every valuation v. Proof. By induction. Case i = 1. We have S v 1,..., S v n A for every v by Lemma 31. Case 1 < i n + 1. Assume the Claim for i 1. For a given valuation v, we have S v i 1, S v i,..., S v n A by the Claim. Let w be the same valuation as v except that v(s i 1 ) w(s i 1 ). By the inductive hypothesis S v i 1, S v i,..., S v n A S w i 1, S w i,..., S w n A By the Deduction Theorem, plus S v i = S w i,..., S v n = S w n, (1) (2) S v i,... S v n S v i 1 A S v i,... S v n S w i 1 A Note that {S v i 1, S w i 1} = {S i 1, S i 1 }. But (3) S i 1 A, S i 1 A A by B C, B C C, so Si v,..., Sn v A by (1), (2), (3), and transitivity of. Now apply the Claim with i = n + 1 to get A.

10 10 (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) 11. The boxed lemmas Items (4) (33) below are theorems that hold for all A, B Sent. ( B A) (( B A) B) (A3) B A, B A B (4), DT A B A (A1), DT A B A (6) with (B = B) ( ) A = A A B A (6) with B = B A, A B (5), (7), (8) B A, A B (5), (8) B A, A B (5), (7) A A B (9), DT B A A B (10), DT B A A B (11), DT B B, B B (10) with (A = B) B B Lemma 18 B B (15), (16) B B B B, B B B B (17), DT B B (19), (20) B B (18) with (B = B) ( ) A = B (8) with B = B (21), DT A, A B B (17) with (B = A), (21) A B A B A B B A (23), DT (14) with A B B A (24), (25) A B B A (10) with A B, A B B (26), (27), (5) ( ) A = B B = A ( ) A = B B = A A, A B B A, A B, B A (A B) B (29), DT (A B) B B (A B) (26) with (A = A B) A B (A B) (30), (31) A, B (A B) (32), DT The boxed lemmas have now been proved, since C B C is (6), B B C is (12), B B is (21), B, C (B C)) is (33), and B C, B C C is (28).

1. Propositional Calculus

1. Propositional Calculus 1. Propositional Calculus Some notes for Math 601, Fall 2010 based on Elliott Mendelson, Introduction to Mathematical Logic, Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall. 2. Syntax ( grammar ). 1.1, p. 1. Given:

More information

Notes for Math 601, Fall based on Introduction to Mathematical Logic by Elliott Mendelson Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall

Notes for Math 601, Fall based on Introduction to Mathematical Logic by Elliott Mendelson Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall Notes for Math 601, Fall 2010 based on Introduction to Mathematical Logic by Elliott Mendelson Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall All first-order languages contain the variables: v 0, v 1, v 2,... the

More information

Applied 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 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 information

Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Natural 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 information

Classical Propositional Logic

Classical 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 information

An Introduction to Modal Logic III

An 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 information

Informal Statement Calculus

Informal 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 information

Introduction to Metalogic

Introduction 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 information

1 Completeness Theorem for First Order Logic

1 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 information

Gödel s Completeness Theorem

Gödel 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 information

Přednáška 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 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 information

Basic Algebraic Logic

Basic Algebraic Logic ELTE 2013. September Today Past 1 Universal Algebra 1 Algebra 2 Transforming Algebras... Past 1 Homomorphism 2 Subalgebras 3 Direct products 3 Varieties 1 Algebraic Model Theory 1 Term Algebras 2 Meanings

More information

CMPSCI 601: Tarski s Truth Definition Lecture 15. where

CMPSCI 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 information

Propositional and Predicate Logic - V

Propositional and Predicate Logic - V Propositional and Predicate Logic - V Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK WS 2016/2017 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - V WS 2016/2017 1 / 21 Formal proof systems Hilbert s calculus

More information

Logic via Algebra. Sam Chong Tay. A Senior Exercise in Mathematics Kenyon College November 29, 2012

Logic via Algebra. Sam Chong Tay. A Senior Exercise in Mathematics Kenyon College November 29, 2012 Logic via Algebra Sam Chong Tay A Senior Exercise in Mathematics Kenyon College November 29, 2012 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to gain insight to mathematical logic through an algebraic perspective.

More information

Sequences of height 1 primes in Z[X]

Sequences of height 1 primes in Z[X] Sequences of height 1 primes in Z[X] Stephen McAdam Department of Mathematics University of Texas Austin TX 78712 mcadam@math.utexas.edu Abstract: For each partition J K of {1, 2,, n} (n 2) with J 2, let

More information

On the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs

On 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 information

Formal Epistemology: Lecture Notes. Horacio Arló-Costa Carnegie Mellon University

Formal Epistemology: Lecture Notes. Horacio Arló-Costa Carnegie Mellon University Formal Epistemology: Lecture Notes Horacio Arló-Costa Carnegie Mellon University hcosta@andrew.cmu.edu Logical preliminaries Let L 0 be a language containing a complete set of Boolean connectives, including

More information

CHAPTER 2. FIRST ORDER LOGIC

CHAPTER 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 information

Overview. 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. 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 information

02 Propositional Logic

02 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 information

AN EXTENSION OF THE PROBABILITY LOGIC LP P 2. Tatjana Stojanović 1, Ana Kaplarević-Mališić 1 and Zoran Ognjanović 2

AN EXTENSION OF THE PROBABILITY LOGIC LP P 2. Tatjana Stojanović 1, Ana Kaplarević-Mališić 1 and Zoran Ognjanović 2 45 Kragujevac J. Math. 33 (2010) 45 62. AN EXTENSION OF THE PROBABILITY LOGIC LP P 2 Tatjana Stojanović 1, Ana Kaplarević-Mališić 1 and Zoran Ognjanović 2 1 University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Science,

More information

1 Completeness Theorem for Classical Predicate

1 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 information

Stat 451: Solutions to Assignment #1

Stat 451: Solutions to Assignment #1 Stat 451: Solutions to Assignment #1 2.1) By definition, 2 Ω is the set of all subsets of Ω. Therefore, to show that 2 Ω is a σ-algebra we must show that the conditions of the definition σ-algebra are

More information

Filtrations and Basic Proof Theory Notes for Lecture 5

Filtrations and Basic Proof Theory Notes for Lecture 5 Filtrations and Basic Proof Theory Notes for Lecture 5 Eric Pacuit March 13, 2012 1 Filtration Let M = W, R, V be a Kripke model. Suppose that Σ is a set of formulas closed under subformulas. We write

More information

GÖDEL S COMPLETENESS AND INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS. Contents 1. Introduction Gödel s Completeness Theorem

GÖDEL 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 information

Propositional 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 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 information

Mathematics 114L Spring 2018 D.A. Martin. Mathematical Logic

Mathematics 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 information

4. Derived Leibniz rules

4. Derived Leibniz rules Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 29/1 (2000), pp. 75 87 George Tourlakis A BASIC FORMAL EQUATIONAL PREDICATE LOGIC PART II Abstract We continue our exploration of the Basic Formal Equational Predicate

More information

Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents

Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents Kyle Brooks April 18, 2012 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Formal Logic Systems 1 2.1 Consequence Relations......................... 2 3 Propositional Logic

More information

Chapter 3: Propositional Calculus: Deductive Systems. September 19, 2008

Chapter 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 information

3 Propositional Logic

3 Propositional Logic 3 Propositional Logic 3.1 Syntax 3.2 Semantics 3.3 Equivalence and Normal Forms 3.4 Proof Procedures 3.5 Properties Propositional Logic (25th October 2007) 1 3.1 Syntax Definition 3.0 An alphabet Σ consists

More information

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR 1 Overview Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies Today Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof

More information

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR 1 Overview Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies Today Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof

More information

Logic, Sets, and Proofs

Logic, Sets, and Proofs Logic, Sets, and Proofs David A. Cox and Catherine C. McGeoch Amherst College 1 Logic Logical Operators. A logical statement is a mathematical statement that can be assigned a value either true or false.

More information

Propositional Dynamic Logic

Propositional Dynamic Logic Propositional Dynamic Logic Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Syntax and Semantics 2 2.1 Syntax................................. 2 2.2 Semantics............................... 2 3 Hilbert-style axiom system

More information

Language of Propositional Logic

Language of Propositional Logic Logic A logic has: 1. An alphabet that contains all the symbols of the language of the logic. 2. A syntax giving the rules that define the well formed expressions of the language of the logic (often called

More information

Axioms for Set Theory

Axioms for Set Theory Axioms for Set Theory The following is a subset of the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms for set theory. In this setting, all objects are sets which are denoted by letters, e.g. x, y, X, Y. Equality is logical identity:

More information

5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting

5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting 5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting Let N denote the positive integers, N 0 := N {0} be the non-negative integers and Z = N 0 ( N) the positive and negative integers including 0, Q the rational numbers,

More information

1. Model existence theorem.

1. Model existence theorem. We fix a first order logic F such that 1. Model existence theorem. C. We let S be the set of statements of F and we suppose Γ S. We let VFT be the set of variable free terms. For each s VFT we let [s]

More information

CHAPTER 4 CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS

CHAPTER 4 CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS CHAPTER 4 CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS 1 Language There are several propositional languages that are routinely called classical propositional logic languages. It is due to the functional dependency

More information

The following techniques for methods of proofs are discussed in our text: - Vacuous proof - Trivial proof

The following techniques for methods of proofs are discussed in our text: - Vacuous proof - Trivial proof Ch. 1.6 Introduction to Proofs The following techniques for methods of proofs are discussed in our text - Vacuous proof - Trivial proof - Direct proof - Indirect proof (our book calls this by contraposition)

More information

Propositional logic. First order logic. Alexander Clark. Autumn 2014

Propositional logic. First order logic. Alexander Clark. Autumn 2014 Propositional logic First order logic Alexander Clark Autumn 2014 Formal Logic Logical arguments are valid because of their form. Formal languages are devised to express exactly that relevant form and

More information

Propositional Calculus - Soundness & Completeness of H

Propositional Calculus - Soundness & Completeness of H Propositional Calculus - Soundness & Completeness of H Moonzoo Kim CS Dept. KAIST moonzoo@cs.kaist.ac.kr 1 Review Goal of logic To check whether given a formula Á is valid To prove a given formula Á `

More information

Syntactic Characterisations in Model Theory

Syntactic Characterisations in Model Theory Department of Mathematics Bachelor Thesis (7.5 ECTS) Syntactic Characterisations in Model Theory Author: Dionijs van Tuijl Supervisor: Dr. Jaap van Oosten June 15, 2016 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Preliminaries

More information

Marie Duží

Marie 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 information

Natural Deduction. Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson

Natural 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 information

Propositional Logic: Part II - Syntax & Proofs 0-0

Propositional 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 information

Propositional logic (revision) & semantic entailment. p. 1/34

Propositional logic (revision) & semantic entailment. p. 1/34 Propositional logic (revision) & semantic entailment p. 1/34 Reading The background reading for propositional logic is Chapter 1 of Huth/Ryan. (This will cover approximately the first three lectures.)

More information

The Process of Mathematical Proof

The Process of Mathematical Proof 1 The Process of Mathematical Proof Introduction. Mathematical proofs use the rules of logical deduction that grew out of the work of Aristotle around 350 BC. In previous courses, there was probably an

More information

First-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms

First-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 information

Overview. Knowledge-Based Agents. Introduction. COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

Overview. Knowledge-Based Agents. Introduction. COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies oday Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof theory Natural

More information

The Countable Henkin Principle

The Countable Henkin Principle The Countable Henkin Principle Robert Goldblatt Abstract. This is a revised and extended version of an article which encapsulates a key aspect of the Henkin method in a general result about the existence

More information

KRIPKE S THEORY OF TRUTH 1. INTRODUCTION

KRIPKE 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 information

Modal Logic XX. Yanjing Wang

Modal Logic XX. Yanjing Wang Modal Logic XX Yanjing Wang Department of Philosophy, Peking University May 6th, 2016 Advanced Modal Logic (2016 Spring) 1 Completeness A traditional view of Logic A logic Λ is a collection of formulas

More information

Modal and temporal logic

Modal and temporal logic Modal and temporal logic N. Bezhanishvili I. Hodkinson C. Kupke Imperial College London 1 / 83 Overview Part II 1 Soundness and completeness. Canonical models. 3 lectures. 2 Finite model property. Filtrations.

More information

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence Artificial Intelligence Propositional Logic [1] Boolean algebras by examples U X U U = {a} U = {a, b} U = {a, b, c} {a} {b} {a, b} {a, c} {b, c}... {a} {b} {c} {a, b} {a} The arrows represents proper inclusion

More information

The Logic of Proofs, Semantically

The Logic of Proofs, Semantically The Logic of Proofs, Semantically Melvin Fitting Dept. Mathematics and Computer Science Lehman College (CUNY), 250 Bedford Park Boulevard West Bronx, NY 10468-1589 e-mail: fitting@lehman.cuny.edu web page:

More information

3. Only sequences that were formed by using finitely many applications of rules 1 and 2, are propositional formulas.

3. 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 information

Formal (natural) deduction in propositional logic

Formal (natural) deduction in propositional logic Formal (natural) deduction in propositional logic Lila Kari University of Waterloo Formal (natural) deduction in propositional logic CS245, Logic and Computation 1 / 67 I know what you re thinking about,

More information

CONTENTS. Appendix C: Gothic Alphabet 109

CONTENTS. 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 information

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352 Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352 Ivan Avramidi New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology Socorro, NM 87801 June 3, 2004 Author: Ivan Avramidi; File: absmath.tex; Date: June 11,

More information

Handout on Logic, Axiomatic Methods, and Proofs MATH Spring David C. Royster UNC Charlotte

Handout on Logic, Axiomatic Methods, and Proofs MATH Spring David C. Royster UNC Charlotte Handout on Logic, Axiomatic Methods, and Proofs MATH 3181 001 Spring 1999 David C. Royster UNC Charlotte January 18, 1999 Chapter 1 Logic and the Axiomatic Method 1.1 Introduction Mathematicians use a

More information

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

Part 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 information

USING ULTRAPOWERS TO CHARACTERIZE ELEMENTARY EQUIVALENCE

USING ULTRAPOWERS TO CHARACTERIZE ELEMENTARY EQUIVALENCE USING ULTRAPOWERS TO CHARACTERIZE ELEMENTARY EQUIVALENCE MIKAYLA KELLEY Abstract. This paper will establish that ultrapowers can be used to determine whether or not two models have the same theory. More

More information

VALUATIONS FOR DIRECT PROPOSITIONAL

VALUATIONS FOR DIRECT PROPOSITIONAL VALUATIONS FOR DIRECT PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC In (1969) a subsystem of classical propositional logic - called direct logic since all indirect inferences are excluded from it - was formulated as a generalized

More information

A Weak Post s Theorem and the Deduction Theorem Retold

A Weak Post s Theorem and the Deduction Theorem Retold Chapter I A Weak Post s Theorem and the Deduction Theorem Retold This note retells (1) A weak form of Post s theorem: If Γ is finite and Γ = taut A, then Γ A and derives as a corollary the Deduction Theorem:

More information

Learning Goals of CS245 Logic and Computation

Learning 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 information

A SEQUENT SYSTEM OF THE LOGIC R FOR ROSSER SENTENCES 2. Abstract

A SEQUENT SYSTEM OF THE LOGIC R FOR ROSSER SENTENCES 2. Abstract Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 33/1 (2004), pp. 11 21 Katsumi Sasaki 1 Shigeo Ohama A SEQUENT SYSTEM OF THE LOGIC R FOR ROSSER SENTENCES 2 Abstract To discuss Rosser sentences, Guaspari and Solovay

More information

Lecture 9. Model theory. Consistency, independence, completeness, categoricity of axiom systems. Expanded with algebraic view.

Lecture 9. Model theory. Consistency, independence, completeness, categoricity of axiom systems. Expanded with algebraic view. V. Borschev and B. Partee, October 17-19, 2006 p. 1 Lecture 9. Model theory. Consistency, independence, completeness, categoricity of axiom systems. Expanded with algebraic view. CONTENTS 0. Syntax and

More information

Handbook of Logic and Proof Techniques for Computer Science

Handbook 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 information

Packet #1: Logic & Proofs. Applied Discrete Mathematics

Packet #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 information

Propositional Language - Semantics

Propositional Language - Semantics Propositional Language - Semantics Lila Kari University of Waterloo Propositional Language - Semantics CS245, Logic and Computation 1 / 41 Syntax and semantics Syntax Semantics analyzes Form analyzes Meaning

More information

UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA. School of Mathematics UG End of Year Examination MATHEMATICAL LOGIC WITH ADVANCED TOPICS MTH-4D23

UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA. School of Mathematics UG End of Year Examination MATHEMATICAL LOGIC WITH ADVANCED TOPICS MTH-4D23 UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA School of Mathematics UG End of Year Examination 2003-2004 MATHEMATICAL LOGIC WITH ADVANCED TOPICS Time allowed: 3 hours Attempt Question ONE and FOUR other questions. Candidates

More information

Introduction to Metalogic 1

Introduction to Metalogic 1 Philosophy 135 Spring 2012 Tony Martin Introduction to Metalogic 1 1 The semantics of sentential logic. The language L of sentential logic. Symbols of L: (i) sentence letters p 0, p 1, p 2,... (ii) connectives,

More information

185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic

185.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 information

AI Principles, Semester 2, Week 2, Lecture 5 Propositional Logic and Predicate Logic

AI Principles, Semester 2, Week 2, Lecture 5 Propositional Logic and Predicate Logic AI Principles, Semester 2, Week 2, Lecture 5 Propositional Logic and Predicate Logic Propositional logic Logical connectives Rules for wffs Truth tables for the connectives Using Truth Tables to evaluate

More information

Lecture 4: Proposition, Connectives and Truth Tables

Lecture 4: Proposition, Connectives and Truth Tables Discrete Mathematics (II) Spring 2017 Lecture 4: Proposition, Connectives and Truth Tables Lecturer: Yi Li 1 Overview In last lecture, we give a brief introduction to mathematical logic and then redefine

More information

Meta-logic derivation rules

Meta-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 information

Artificial Intelligence. Propositional logic

Artificial Intelligence. Propositional logic Artificial Intelligence Propositional logic Propositional Logic: Syntax Syntax of propositional logic defines allowable sentences Atomic sentences consists of a single proposition symbol Each symbol stands

More information

Propositional Logic: Syntax

Propositional Logic: Syntax 4 Propositional Logic: Syntax Reading: Metalogic Part II, 22-26 Contents 4.1 The System PS: Syntax....................... 49 4.1.1 Axioms and Rules of Inference................ 49 4.1.2 Definitions.................................

More information

Kreisel s Conjecture with minimality principle

Kreisel s Conjecture with minimality principle Kreisel s Conjecture with minimality principle Pavel Hrubeš November 9, 2008 Abstract We prove that Kreisel s Conjecture is true, if Peano arithmetic is axiomatised using minimality principle and axioms

More information

A NEW FOUNDATION OF A COMPLETE BOOLEAN EQUATIONAL LOGIC

A NEW FOUNDATION OF A COMPLETE BOOLEAN EQUATIONAL LOGIC Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 38:1/2 (2009), pp. 13 28 George Tourlakis A NEW FOUNDATION OF A COMPLETE BOOLEAN EQUATIONAL LOGIC Abstract We redefine the equational-proofs formalism of [2], [3],

More information

TR : Tableaux for the Logic of Proofs

TR : Tableaux for the Logic of Proofs City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Computer Science Technical Reports Graduate Center 2004 TR-2004001: Tableaux for the Logic of Proofs Bryan Renne Follow this and additional works

More information

4 The semantics of full first-order logic

4 The semantics of full first-order logic 4 The semantics of full first-order logic In this section we make two additions to the languages L C of 3. The first is the addition of a symbol for identity. The second is the addition of symbols that

More information

Proof Theoretical Studies on Semilattice Relevant Logics

Proof Theoretical Studies on Semilattice Relevant Logics Proof Theoretical Studies on Semilattice Relevant Logics Ryo Kashima Department of Mathematical and Computing Sciences Tokyo Institute of Technology Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552, Japan. e-mail: kashima@is.titech.ac.jp

More information

Rasiowa-Sikorski proof system for the non-fregean sentential logic SCI

Rasiowa-Sikorski proof system for the non-fregean sentential logic SCI Rasiowa-Sikorski proof system for the non-fregean sentential logic SCI Joanna Golińska-Pilarek National Institute of Telecommunications, Warsaw, J.Golinska-Pilarek@itl.waw.pl We will present complete and

More information

Chapter 4: Classical Propositional Semantics

Chapter 4: Classical Propositional Semantics Chapter 4: Classical Propositional Semantics Language : L {,,, }. Classical Semantics assumptions: TWO VALUES: there are only two logical values: truth (T) and false (F), and EXTENSIONALITY: the logical

More information

Glossary of Logical Terms

Glossary of Logical Terms Math 304 Spring 2007 Glossary of Logical Terms The following glossary briefly describes some of the major technical logical terms used in this course. The glossary should be read through at the beginning

More information

Artificial Intelligence. Propositional Logic. Copyright 2011 Dieter Fensel and Florian Fischer

Artificial Intelligence. Propositional Logic. Copyright 2011 Dieter Fensel and Florian Fischer Artificial Intelligence Propositional Logic Copyright 2011 Dieter Fensel and Florian Fischer 1 Where are we? # Title 1 Introduction 2 Propositional Logic 3 Predicate Logic 4 Reasoning 5 Search Methods

More information

Advanced Topics in LP and FP

Advanced Topics in LP and FP Lecture 1: Prolog and Summary of this lecture 1 Introduction to Prolog 2 3 Truth value evaluation 4 Prolog Logic programming language Introduction to Prolog Introduced in the 1970s Program = collection

More information

Madhavan Mukund Chennai Mathematical Institute

Madhavan Mukund Chennai Mathematical Institute AN INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC Madhavan Mukund Chennai Mathematical Institute E-mail: madhavan@cmiacin Abstract ese are lecture notes for an introductory course on logic aimed at graduate students in Computer

More information

Version January Please send comments and corrections to

Version January Please send comments and corrections to Mathematical Logic for Computer Science Second revised edition, Springer-Verlag London, 2001 Answers to Exercises Mordechai Ben-Ari Department of Science Teaching Weizmann Institute of Science Rehovot

More information

Semantics of intuitionistic propositional logic

Semantics of intuitionistic propositional logic Semantics of intuitionistic propositional logic Erik Palmgren Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University Lecture Notes for Applied Logic, Fall 2009 1 Introduction Intuitionistic logic is a weakening

More information

Propositional and Predicate Logic - VII

Propositional 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 information

Deductive Systems. Lecture - 3

Deductive Systems. Lecture - 3 Deductive Systems Lecture - 3 Axiomatic System Axiomatic System (AS) for PL AS is based on the set of only three axioms and one rule of deduction. It is minimal in structure but as powerful as the truth

More information

The logic of subset spaces, topologic and the local difference modality K

The logic of subset spaces, topologic and the local difference modality K The logic of subset spaces, topologic and the local difference modality K Isabel Bevort July 18, 2013 Bachelor Thesis in Mathematics Supervisor: dr. Alexandru Baltag Korteweg-De Vries Instituut voor Wiskunde

More information

An Introduction to Modal Logic V

An Introduction to Modal Logic V An Introduction to Modal Logic V Axiomatic Extensions and Classes of Frames Marco Cerami Palacký University in Olomouc Department of Computer Science Olomouc, Czech Republic Olomouc, November 7 th 2013

More information

Computation and Logic Definitions

Computation and Logic Definitions Computation and Logic Definitions True and False Also called Boolean truth values, True and False represent the two values or states an atom can assume. We can use any two distinct objects to represent

More information

Notes on Modal Logic

Notes on Modal Logic Notes on Modal Logic Notes for PHIL370 Eric Pacuit October 22, 2012 These short notes are intended to introduce some of the basic concepts of Modal Logic. The primary goal is to provide students in Philosophy

More information