Basic Algebraic Logic

Similar documents
An Introduction to Modal Logic III

Applied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw

Propositional and Predicate Logic - VII

1. Propositional Calculus

02 Propositional Logic

Přednáška 12. Důkazové kalkuly Kalkul Hilbertova typu. 11/29/2006 Hilbertův kalkul 1

1. Propositional Calculus

Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents

Modal Logic XX. Yanjing Wang

An Introduction to Modal Logic V

Kazimierz SWIRYDOWICZ UPPER PART OF THE LATTICE OF EXTENSIONS OF THE POSITIVE RELEVANT LOGIC R +

Logics for Compact Hausdorff Spaces via de Vries Duality

cse371/mat371 LOGIC Professor Anita Wasilewska Fall 2018

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic

CHAPTER 11. Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic

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

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

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

Towards A Multi-Agent Subset Space Logic

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic

Positive provability logic

Algebraic Logic. Hiroakira Ono Research Center for Integrated Science Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

Equational Logic. Chapter Syntax Terms and Term Algebras

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

Notes on Modal Logic

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

Probability Measures in Gödel Logic

Filtrations and Basic Proof Theory Notes for Lecture 5

127: Lecture notes HT18. Week 3. D.I. Semantic and proof-theoretic approaches to consequence (LfP 1.5)

Varieties of Heyting algebras and superintuitionistic logics

Mathematical Logic. Introduction to Reasoning and Automated Reasoning. Hilbert-style Propositional Reasoning. Chiara Ghidini. FBK-IRST, Trento, Italy

The Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic

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

Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Classical Propositional Logic

The Many Faces of Modal Logic Day 3: Algebraic Semantics

Model Theory MARIA MANZANO. University of Salamanca, Spain. Translated by RUY J. G. B. DE QUEIROZ

03 Review of First-Order Logic

Canonical models for normal logics (Completeness via canonicity)

Part II Logic and Set Theory

On some Metatheorems about FOL

On Modal Logics of Partial Recursive Functions

Mathematical Logic. Reasoning in First Order Logic. Chiara Ghidini. FBK-IRST, Trento, Italy

03 Propositional Logic II

On Definability in Multimodal Logic

Duality for first order logic

ON DEFINABILITY IN MULTIMODAL LOGIC

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

185.A09 Advanced Mathematical Logic

Nonclassical logics (Nichtklassische Logiken)

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

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

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

Propositional and Predicate Logic - V

Notes on Modal Logic

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

Propositional and Predicate Logic - XIII

cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006

Propositional Dynamic Logic

Modal Logic XXI. Yanjing Wang

Semantics for Propositional Logic

The Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming

Proper multi-type display calculi for classical and intuitionistic inquisitive logic

Relational semantics for a fragment of linear logic

REDUCTION OF HILBERT-TYPE PROOF SYSTEMS TO THE IF-THEN-ELSE EQUATIONAL LOGIC. 1. Introduction

Logical Closure Properties of Propositional Proof Systems

Interpretability Logic

Int. J. of Computers, Communications & Control, ISSN , E-ISSN Vol. V (2010), No. 5, pp C. Chiriţă

On Jankov-de Jongh formulas

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

Completeness for coalgebraic µ-calculus: part 2. Fatemeh Seifan (Joint work with Sebastian Enqvist and Yde Venema)

Syntax. Notation Throughout, and when not otherwise said, we assume a vocabulary V = C F P.

Consequence Relations of Modal Logic

Inference in Propositional Logic

A NEW VERSION OF AN OLD MODAL INCOMPLETENESS THEOREM

Monadic GMV -algebras

Universal Algebra for Logics

Inquisitive Logic. Ivano Ciardelli.

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

Outline. Overview. Syntax Semantics. Introduction Hilbert Calculus Natural Deduction. 1 Introduction. 2 Language: Syntax and Semantics

Modal and temporal logic

Introduction to Metalogic

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

REPRESENTATION THEOREMS FOR IMPLICATION STRUCTURES

A Survey of Abstract Algebraic Logic

A NOTE ON DERIVATION RULES IN MODAL LOGIC

Lecture 11: Measuring the Complexity of Proofs

A simplified proof of arithmetical completeness theorem for provability logic GLP

First Part: Basic Algebraic Logic

Deductive Characterization of Logic

Logic Michælmas 2003

An Introduction to Modal Logic I

Topics in Subset Space Logic

1 Completeness Theorem for First Order Logic

Madhavan Mukund Chennai Mathematical Institute

Logics above S4 and the Lebesgue measure algebra

Model theory, stability, applications

From Syllogism to Common Sense

From Residuated Lattices to Boolean Algebras with Operators

ALGEBRAIC METHODS OF AUTOMATED REASONING IN MONADIC LOGIC by José A. Alonso in Sevilla (Spain)

Transcription:

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 3 Substitutions 4 Truth and Validity 5 Birkhoff-Theorem Today 1 Algebraization of Traditional Syntax 1 Lindenbaum Tarski Algebras 2 Boolean Algebras 2 Algebraization of Traditional Semantics 1 2-valued Semantics 2 Modal semantics 3 Generalized semantics 3 Representation Today 1 Modal Logic 2 Algebraic Proof System

Algebraization of Traditional Syntax

Reminder Language: Φ is the set of atomic sentences (sometimes called proposition letters ). The set of well-formed formulas based on Φ is ined by the rule ϕ ::= p ϕ ϕ ψ. where p ranges over Φ. We denote this set by FORM(Φ). Abbreviations: ϕ ψ ϕ ψ ϕ ψ ( ϕ ψ) (ϕ ψ) (ϕ ψ) (ψ ϕ)

Reminder The Frege Hilbert axiom system: ϕ (ψ ϕ) ( ϕ ψ) (ψ ϕ) (ϕ (ψ χ)) ((ϕ ψ) (ϕ χ)) ϕ, ϕ ψ ψ A proof of p p: p ((q p) p) 1st axiom (p ((q p) p)) (p (q p)) (p p) 2nd axiom (p (q p)) (p p) modus ponens (p (q p)) 1st axiom p p modus ponens

Algebraization of Traditional Syntax Note that traditional syntax is unstructurized : Definition (Formula algebra) Form(Φ) = FORM(Φ), +,, where ϕ + ψ ϕ = (ϕ ψ) = ϕ. Note that while + is a function + : FORM 2 FORM, is just a symbol. Note that + is not commutative: p + q = (p q) (q p) = q + p The reason: they are different formulas, even if they are seem to be equivalent. However, we have tools in the syntax to introduce a notion for this equvalence.

Algebraization of Traditional Syntax However, we have tools in the syntax to introduce a notion for this equvalence. Definition (Provable equivalency) Let denote the derivability in the Frege Hilbert calculus. ϕ ψ ϕ ψ Now that we have a relation on the algebra Form, an algebraist will surely ask the following questions: First question: Is this an equivalence relation, i.e., does it partition the carrier? Second question: Is this a congruence relation, i.e., is this relation closed to the operations, +?

Algebraization of Traditional Syntax Theorem ( is a Congruence Relation) is a congruence relation on Form, i.e., it is an equivalence relation closed to the functions of Form: (Equivalence relation) ϕ ϕ ϕ ψ ψ ϕ ϕ ψ ψ χ ϕ χ (Congruence relation) ϕ ψ ϕ ψ ϕ 1 ψ 1 ϕ 2 ψ 2 ϕ 1 ϕ 2 ψ 1 ψ 2

Lindenbaum Tarski Algebra Definition (Lindenbaum Tarski Algebra) The set of equivalence classes of FORM will be denoted by FORM/ = {P FORM : ( ϕ, ψ P) ϕ ψ} Let us denote the equivalence class containg a formula ϕ by [ϕ]. Then the Lindenbaum Tarski algebra of FORM(Φ) and is the algebra Form/ = FORM/, +,, 0, where the functions ined on the equivalence classes (instead of their elements): [ϕ] [ϕ] + [ψ] 0 = [ ] = [ ϕ] = [ϕ + ψ]

Lindenbaum Tarski Algebra The Lindenbaum-Tarski algebra is a canonical model, a universal refuting model : It gives counterexamples for every non-theorem of the Frege Hilbert calculus. Theorem ( Canonical Algebra Theorem ) ϕ Form/ = ϕ =

Lindenbaum Tarski Algebra Now commutativity became true: FORM/ = x + y = y + x The situation is the same with all usual algebraic rules of classical logic. Are we able to ine these logical equations recursively as well, i.e., can we axiomatize the set of valid logical equations?

Boolean Algebra Definition (Boolean Algebra) The Boolean equations are the following set of equations: x + y = y + x x y = y x (x + y) + z = x + (y + z) (x y) z = y (x z) x + 0 = x x 1 = 1 x + ( x) = 1 x ( x) = 0 x + (y z) = (x + y) (x + z) x (y + z) = (x y) + (x z) An algebraic structure A = A, + A, A, 0 A is a Boolean algebra iff it satisfies the Boolean equations. The variety of Boolean algebras will be denoted by BA.

Boolean Algebra Theorem Lindenbaum-Tarski algebras are Boolean algebras.

Boolean Algebra Theorem Lindenbaum-Tarski algebras are Boolean algebras. Proof. Check that the Boolean equations are derivable from the Frege Hilbert Calculus

Boolean Algebra Theorem Lindenbaum-Tarski algebras are Boolean algebras. Theorem (BA algebraizes classical theoremhood) ϕ BA = ϕ =

Boolean Algebra Theorem Lindenbaum-Tarski algebras are Boolean algebras. Theorem (BA algebraizes classical theoremhood) ϕ BA = ϕ = Proof. : ϕ Form/ = ϕ = BA = ϕ =

Reminder : Proof by induction... ϕ (ψ ϕ) BA = ϕ + ( ψ + ϕ) ( ϕ ψ) (ψ ϕ) BA = (ϕ + ψ) + ( ψ + ϕ) (ϕ (ψ χ)) ((ϕ ψ) (ϕ χ)) BA = ( ϕ + ( ψ + χ)) + ( ( ϕ + ψ) + ( ϕ + χ)) ϕ, ϕ ψ ψ ϕ, ϕ + ψ ψ (Or maybe Natürliche Kalkül... )

Algebraization of Traditional Semantics

Algebraization of 2-valued Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = 0 [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = 1 [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = max ( [ϕ ] M, [ψ ] M )

Algebraization of 2-valued Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = 0 [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = 1 [ϕ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = max ( [ϕ ] M, [ψ ] M ) = [ϕ ] M + [ψ ] M

Algebraization of 2-valued Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = 0 [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = 1 [ϕ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = max ( [ϕ ] M, [ψ ] M ) = [ϕ ] M + [ψ ] M This is a homomorphism between Form and Definition (Algebra of truth values) 2 = 2, +,, 0 where a = 1 a and a + b = max(a, b). What is more, trivially Theorem (2 Algebraizes Classical Validity) = ϕ 2 = ϕ =

Algebraization of Traditional Semantics

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = W [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ψ ] M

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = W [ϕ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M + [ψ ] M

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Remember [ ] M? [ ] M = [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = W [ϕ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M + [ψ ] M This is a homomorphism between Form and Definition (Powerset Algebras) The power set algebra of A: What is more, P(A) = P(A),,, Theorem (Powersets algebraize classical validity) = ϕ {P(A) : A is a set} = ϕ =

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem Every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2 = {, { }}, and conversely. Proof. First we show that ( A)( I)P(A) = 2 I. Brilliant idea: Let I be A. Remember that P(A) = 2 A = A 2. What are these? Characteristic functions: functions deciding whether an element a of A is in the subset X or not: 1, if a X χ X (a) 0, if a / X

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem Every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2 = {, { }}, and conversely. Proof. 1, if a X χ X (a) 0, if a / X

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem Every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2 = {, { }}, and conversely. Proof. 1, if a X χ X (a) 0, if a / X A P(A) a b c d e X χ α f : A 2 a 1 b 1 c 1 d 0 e 0 HW: Verify that χ : P(A) A 2.

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem Every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2 = {, { }}, and conversely. Proof. A P(A) a b c d e X χ α f : A 2 a 1 b 1 c 1 d 0 e 0 Now we show that ( I)( A)P(A) = 2 I. Again, I := A. Then subsets = those elements whose image is 1 by f

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem Every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2 = {, { }}, and conversely. Proof. A P(A) a b c d e X χ α f : A 2 a 1 b 1 c 1 d 0 e 0 HW: Verify that α : I 2 P(A). α(f) = {i I : f(i) = 1}.

Algebraization of Modal Semantics Theorem (Powersets algebraize classical validity) = ϕ {P(A) : A is a set} = ϕ = Proof. Validity of equations is preserved under, and every power set algebra is isomorphic to a power of 2.

Algebraization of Generalized Semantics

Algebraization of Generalized Semantics Definition (Set Algebras) A set algebra or field of sets is a subalgebra of a power set algebra. The class of set algebras will be denoted by Set. Theorem (Set algebraizes classical validity) = ϕ Set = ϕ = Proof. Validity of equations is preserved under.

Summary Traditional Algebraic Language Propositional Equational Calculus Natural Deduction Frege Hilbert BA+ Equational logic Semantics 2-valued 2 Modal {P(A) : A is a set} Generalized Set

How do we use Algebraization? Theorem (Stone) Any boolean algebra is isomorphic to a set algebra. Or BA = ({2}). Theorem (Weak completeness) The Frege-Hilbert calculus is sound and weakly complete with respect to the 2-valued semantics, modal semantics and generalized semantics. Proof. ϕ BA = ϕ = Set = ϕ = = ϕ

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 3 Substitutions 4 Truth and Validity 5 Birkhoff-Theorem Today 1 Algebraization of Traditional Syntax 1 Lindenbaum Tarski Algebras 2 Boolean Algebras 2 Algebraization of Traditional Semantics 1 2-valued Semantics 2 Modal semantics 3 Generalized semantics 3 Representation Today 1 Modal Logic 2 Algebraic Proof System

Modal Logic

Language Φ is the set of atomic sentences (sometimes called proposition letters ). The set of well-formed formulas based on Φ is ined by the rule ϕ ::= p ϕ ϕ ψ. ϕ where p ranges over Φ. We denote this set by FORM(Φ). Abbreviations: ϕ ψ ϕ ψ ϕ ψ ϕ ( ϕ ψ) (ϕ ψ) (ϕ ψ) (ψ ϕ) ϕ

Reminder The minimal normal modal system K: ϕ (ψ ϕ) ( ϕ ψ) (ψ ϕ) (ϕ (ψ χ)) ((ϕ ψ) (ϕ χ)) (K) : (ϕ ψ) ( ϕ ψ) ϕ, ϕ ψ ψ (MP) ϕ ϕ (RN) A proof of the Lemmon-rule: ϕ ψ ϕ ϕ : ϕ ψ Theorem by assumption (ϕ ψ) (RN) (ϕ ψ) ( ϕ ψ) (K) ϕ ψ (MP)

Semantics Definition (Frame) A frame/relatitional structure F is a pair of a nonempty set W, called the set of possible worlds, and the accessibility/alternative relation R W 2.

Semantics Definition (Valuations, Models, Truth) Let F = W, R be a frame. The valuations on F are the functions v : Φ P(W). The normal modal models M are the pairs M = F, v = W, R, v The satisfiability / truth / forcing relation : M, w M, w p M, w ϕ = W w v(p) M, w ϕ M, w ϕ ψ M, w ϕ and M, w ψ M, w ϕ ( w w)m, w ϕ R

Intension Definition (Intension) The semantic value or intension induced by the valuation v is the function [ ] M : FORM(Φ) P(W) ined in the following way: [ϕ ] M = {w W : M, w ϕ}, i.e., [ ] M = [p ] M = v(p) [ ϕ ] M = W [ϕ ] M [ϕ ψ ] M = [ϕ ] M [ψ ] M [ ϕ ] M = {HW} [ ϕ ] M = {HW}