Mathematical Logic, an Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Mathematical Logic, an Introduction by Peter Koepke Bonn, Winter 2019/20 Wann sollte die Mathematik je zu einem Anfang gelangen, wenn sie warten wollte, bis die Philosophie über unsere Grundbegrie zur Klarheit und Einmüthigkeit gekommen ist? Unsere einzige Rettung ist der formalistische Standpunkt, undenirte Begrie (wie Zahl, Punkt, Ding, Menge) an die Spitze zu stellen, um deren actuelle oder psychologische oder anschauliche Bedeutung wir uns nicht kümmern, und ebenso unbewiesene Sätze (Axiome), deren actuelle Richtigkeit uns nichts angeht. Aus diesen primitiven Begrien und Urtheilen gewinnen wir durch Denition und Deduction andere, und nur diese Ableitung ist unser Werk und Ziel. (Felix Hausdor, 12. Januar 1918) Table of contents 1 Introduction . 4 I First-order Logic and the Gödel Completeness Theorem . 4 2 The Syntax of rst-order logic: Symbols, words, and formulas . 4 2.1 Motivation: a mathematical statement . 5 2.2 Symbols . 5 2.3 Words . 6 2.4 Terms . 7 2.5 Formulas . 8 3 Semantics . 9 4 The satisfaction relation . 11 5 Logical implication and propositional connectives . 14 6 Substitution and term rules . 15 7 A sequent calculus . 20 8 Derivable sequent rules . 22 8.1 Auxiliary derived rules . 22 8.2 Introduction and elimination of ; ; ::: . 23 8.3 Formal proofs about . ._. .^. 24 9 Consistency . 25 1 2 Section 10 Term models and Henkin sets . 27 11 Constructing Henkin sets . 30 12 The completeness theorem . 34 13 The compactness theorem . 35 II Herbrand's Theorem and Automatic Theorem Proving . 38 14 Normal forms . 38 14.1 Negation normal form . 39 14.2 Conjunctive and disjunctive normal form . 39 14.3 Prenex normal form . 40 14.4 Skolem normal form . 41 15 Herbrand's theorem . 42 16 Computer implementation of symbolic logic . 44 16.1 Formulas . 44 16.2 Negation normal form . 45 16.3 CNF . 46 16.4 DNF . 49 16.5 Latin squares as a SAT problem . 50 17 Resolution . 51 18 Unikation . 53 III Set Theory . 57 19 Set theory . 57 19.1 The origin of set theory . 57 19.2 Set theoretic foundations of mathematics . 58 19.3 Class terms . 60 19.4 Properties of classes . 62 19.5 Set-theoretical axioms in class term notation . 63 20 Relations and functions . 63 20.1 Ordered pairs and cartesian products . 63 20.2 Relations . 64 20.3 Functions . 65 21 Ordinal numbers, induction and recursion . 66 21.1 -Induction . 67 2 21.2 Ordinal numbers . 67 21.3 Ordinal induction . 70 21.4 Ordinal recursion . 71 21.5 Ordinal arithmetic . 73 Table of contents 3 21.6 Sequences . 73 22 Cardinals . 74 23 Natural numbers and nite sets . 75 23.1 Natural numbers . 75 23.2 Finite cardinals . 77 23.3 Finite sets . 77 23.4 Finite sequences . 78 24 Innity . 78 24.1 ! . 79 24.2 Countable sets . 80 24.3 !-Sequences . 81 24.4 Uncountable sets . 82 25 Number systems . 82 25.1 Natural numbers . 86 25.2 Integer numbers . 87 25.3 Rational numbers . 88 25.4 Real numbers . 89 25.5 Discussion . 90 26 The Axiom of Choice . 91 27 The Alefs . 92 28 Cardinal Arithmetic . 93 29 Further Cardinal Arithmetic . 94 30 The Löwenheim-Skolem theorems . 96 IV Incompleteness . 99 31 Formalizing the metatheory in the object theory . 99 32 Sequences . 100 32.1 Symbols and Words . 100 32.2 Calculi . 100 32.3 Gödelization of nite sequences . 102 32.4 Finite and innite sets . 102 33 Formalizing syntax within ST . 102 34 ST in ST . 107 35 The undenability of truth . 107 36 Gödel's incompleteness theorems . 110 4 Section 2 37 The incompleteness of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory . ..

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Mathematical Logic. Introduction. by Vilnis Detlovs And
1 Version released: May 24, 2017 Introduction to Mathematical Logic Hyper-textbook for students by Vilnis Detlovs, Dr. math., and Karlis Podnieks, Dr. math. University of Latvia This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License and is copyrighted © 2000-2017 by us, Vilnis Detlovs and Karlis Podnieks. Sections 1, 2, 3 of this book represent an extended translation of the corresponding chapters of the book: V. Detlovs, Elements of Mathematical Logic, Riga, University of Latvia, 1964, 252 pp. (in Latvian). With kind permission of Dr. Detlovs. Vilnis Detlovs. Memorial Page In preparation – forever (however, since 2000, used successfully in a real logic course for computer science students). This hyper-textbook contains links to: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia; MacTutor History of Mathematics archive of the University of St Andrews; MathWorld of Wolfram Research. 2 Table of Contents References..........................................................................................................3 1. Introduction. What Is Logic, Really?.............................................................4 1.1. Total Formalization is Possible!..............................................................5 1.2. Predicate Languages.............................................................................10 1.3. Axioms of Logic: Minimal System, Constructive System and Classical System..........................................................................................................27 1.4. The Flavor of Proving Directly.............................................................40
[Show full text]
Solving the Boolean Satisfiability Problem Using the Parallel Paradigm Jury Composition
Philosophæ doctor thesis Hoessen Benoît Solving the Boolean Satisfiability problem using the parallel paradigm Jury composition: PhD director Audemard Gilles Professor at Universitéd'Artois PhD co-director Jabbour Sa¨ıd Assistant Professor at Universitéd'Artois PhD co-director Piette Cédric Assistant Professor at Universitéd'Artois Examiner Simon Laurent Professor at University of Bordeaux Examiner Dequen Gilles Professor at University of Picardie Jules Vernes Katsirelos George Chargéde recherche at Institut national de la recherche agronomique, Toulouse Abstract This thesis presents different technique to solve the Boolean satisfiability problem using parallel and distributed architec- tures. In order to provide a complete explanation, a careful presentation of the CDCL algorithm is made, followed by the state of the art in this domain. Once presented, two proposi- tions are made. The first one is an improvement on a portfo- lio algorithm, allowing to exchange more data without loosing efficiency. The second is a complete library with its API al- lowing to easily create distributed SAT solver. Keywords: SAT, parallelism, distributed, solver, logic Résumé Cette thèse présente différentes techniques permettant de résoudre le problème de satisfaction de formule booléenes utilisant le parallélismeet du calcul distribué. Dans le but de fournir une explication la plus complète possible, une présentation détaillée de l'algorithme CDCL est effectuée, suivi d'un étatde l'art. De ce point de départ,deux pistes sont explorées. La premièreest une améliorationd'un algorithme de type portfolio, permettant d'échanger plus d'informations sans perte d’efficacité.
[Show full text]
My Slides for a Course on Satisfiability
Satisfiability Victor W. Marek Computer Science University of Kentucky Spring Semester 2005 Satisfiability – p.1/97 Satisfiability story ie× Á Satisfiability - invented in the ¾¼ of XX century by philosophers and mathematicians (Wittgenstein, Tarski) ie× Á Shannon (late ¾¼ ) applications to what was then known as electrical engineering ie× ie× Á Fundamental developments: ¼ and ¼ – both mathematics of it, and fundamental algorithms ie× Á ¼ - progress in computing speed and solving moderately large problems Á Emergence of “killer applications” in Computer Engineering, Bounded Model Checking Satisfiability – p.2/97 Current situation Á SAT solvers as a class of software Á Solving large cases generated by industrial applications Á Vibrant area of research both in Computer Science and in Computer Engineering ¯ Various CS meetings (SAT, AAAI, CP) ¯ Various CE meetings (CAV, FMCAD, DATE) ¯ CE meetings Stressing applications Satisfiability – p.3/97 This Course Á Providing mathematical and computer science foundations of SAT ¯ General mathematical foundations ¯ Two- and Three- valued logics ¯ Complete sets of functors ¯ Normal forms (including ite) ¯ Compactness of propositional logic ¯ Resolution rule, completeness of resolution, semantical resolution ¯ Fundamental algorithms for SAT ¯ Craig Lemma Satisfiability – p.4/97 And if there is enough of time and will... Á Easy cases of SAT ¯ Horn ¯ 2SAT ¯ Linear formulas Á And if there is time (but notes will be provided anyway) ¯ Expressing runs of polynomial-time NDTM as SAT, NP completeness ¯ “Mix and match” ¯ Learning in SAT, partial closure under resolution ¯ Bounded Model Checking Satisfiability – p.5/97 Various remarks Á Expected involvement of Dr. Truszczynski Á An extensive set of notes (> 200 pages), covering most of topics will be provided f.o.c.
[Show full text]
Skolem's Paradox and Constructivism
CHARLES MCCARTY AND NEIL TENNANT SKOLEM’S PARADOX AND CONSTRUCTIVISM INTRODUCTION Skolem’s paradox has not been shown to arise for constructivism. Indeed, considerations that we shall advance below indicate that the main result cited to produce the paradox could be obtained only by methods not in mainstream intuitionistic practice. It strikes us as an important fact for the philosophy of mathematics. The intuitionistic conception of the mathematical universe appears, as far as we know, to be free from Skolemite stress. If one could discover reasons for believing this to be no accident, it would be an important new con- sideration, in addition to the meaning-theoretic ones advanced by Dummett (1978, ‘Concluding philosophical remarks’), that ought to be assessed when trying to reach a view on the question whether intuitionism is the correct philosophy of mathematics. We give below the detailed reasons why we believe that intuitionistic mathematics is indeed free of the Skolem paradox. They culminate in a strong independence result: even a very powerful version of intuitionis- tic set theory does not yield any of the usual forms of a countable downward Lowenheim - Skolem theorem. The proof draws on the general equivalence described in McCarty (1984) between intuitionistic mathematics and classical recursive mathematics. But first we set the stage by explaining the history of the (classical) paradox, and the philosophical reflections on the foundations of set theory that it has provoked. The recent symposium between Paul Benacerraf and Crispin Wright provides a focus for these considerations. Then we inspect the known proofs of the Lbwenheim-Skolem theorem, and reveal them all to be constructively unacceptable.
[Show full text]
Logic and Computation – CS 2800 Fall 2019
Logic and Computation – CS 2800 Fall 2019 Lecture 12 Propositional logic continued CNF, DNF, complete Boolean bases Stavros Tripakis Discuss homework 02 survey • How many courses are you taking? • How many hours per course would you like to be spending, ideally? — Including everything: attending lectures, reading, homeworks, projects, piazza, … • How many of those hours on homework? Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 2 Outline • Properties of Boolean operators: read and assimilate Section 3.3 of lecture notes! • Normal forms, DNF and CNF • Complete Boolean bases Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 3 Properties of Boolean operators • Review lecture notes, section 3.3 Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 4 Normal forms, CNF, DNF Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 5 Negation Normal Form (NNF) • “Push” all negations all the way to the leaves of the syntax tree of the formula (literals) • Eliminate double negations • Examples: Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 6 Negation Normal Form (NNF) • “Push” all negations all the way to the leaves of the syntax tree of the formula (literals) • Eliminate double negations • Examples: Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 7 Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF) • A formula is in DNF if it is a disjunction of conjunctions of literals • Literal = either a variable or a negated variable • Examples: which formulas below are in DNF? Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 8 Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) • A formula is in CNF if it is a conjunction of disjunctions of literals • A disjunction of literals is also called a clause • Examples: which formulas below are in CNF? Tripakis Logic and Computation, Fall 2019 9 Can we transform any Boolean formula into DNF? • Yes • Brute‐force method: 1.
[Show full text]
Mathematical Logic. Introduction. by Vilnis Detlovs and Karlis Podnieks
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349104699 Introduction to Mathematical Logic, Edition 2021 Book · February 2021 CITATIONS READ 0 1 2 authors, including: Karlis Podnieks University of Latvia 75 PUBLICATIONS 273 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Truth Demystified View project Philosophy of Modeling in 1870s: a Tribute to Hans Vaihinger View project All content following this page was uploaded by Karlis Podnieks on 07 February 2021. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. 1 Version released: February 7, 2021 This edition is dedicated to the memory of Professor Elliott Mendelson, 1931-2020 Introduction to Mathematical Logic Textbook for students Edition 2021 by Vilnis Detlovs, Dr. math., and Karlis Podnieks, Dr. math. University of Latvia This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License and is copyrighted © 2000-2021 by us, Vilnis Detlovs and Karlis Podnieks. Sections 1, 2, 3 of this book represent an extended translation of the corresponding chapters of the book: V. Detlovs, Elements of Mathematical Logic, Riga, University of Latvia, 1964, 252 pp. (in Latvian). With kind permission of Dr. Detlovs. Vilnis Detlovs, 1923-2007. Memorial Page This textbook contains links to: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia; MacTutor History of Mathematics archive of the University of St Andrews; MathWorld of Wolfram Research. 2 Table of Contents References..........................................................................................................3
[Show full text]
An Expansion-Based QBF Solver for Negation Normal Form
An Expansion-based QBF Solver For Negation Normal Form MAGISTERARBEIT zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Diplom-Ingenieur im Magisterstudium INFORMATIK Eingereicht von: Florian Lonsing, 0255959 Angefertigt am: Institut für Formale Modelle und Verifikation Betreuung: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Armin Biere Linz, Dezember 2007 ii Abstract The topic of this master thesis is Nenofex, a solver for quantified boolean formu- lae (QBF) in negation normal form (NNF), which relies on expansion as the core technique for eliminating variables. In contrast to eliminating existentially quan- tified variables by resolution on CNF, which causes the formula size to increase quadratically in the worst case, expansion on NNF is involved with only a linear increase of the formula size. This property motivates the use of NNF instead of CNF combined with expansion. In Nenofex, a formula in NNF is represented as a tree with structural restrictions in order to keep its size small and distances from nodes to the root short. Expansions of variables are scheduled based on estimated expansion costs. The variable with the smallest estimated costs is ex- panded first. In order to remove redundancy from the formula, limited versions of two approaches from the domain of circuit optimization have been integrated. Experimental results show that Nenofex indeed exceeds a given memory limit less frequently than a resolution-based QBF solver for CNF, but also that there is still room for runtime improvements. Kurzfassung In dieser Arbeit wird Nenofex, die Implementierung eines Entscheidungsverfahrens fürQuantifizierte Boolesche Formeln (QBF) in Negationsnormalform (NNF), be- schrieben. In Nenofex werden Variablen sukzessive mittels Expansion aus der Formel eliminiert.
[Show full text]
Normal Forms for Boolean Expressions
Normal Forms for Boolean Expressions A NORMAL FORM defines a class expressions s.t. a. Satisfy certain structural properties b. Are usually universal: able to express every boolean function 1. Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF) - Sum Of Products of literals, i.e., a variable or its negation Example: xy'z + yz + w 2. Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) - Product of CLAUSES, i.e., sum of literals Example: (z+w).(x+y+z'+w), (x+y'+z).(y+z).w‘ 3. Negation Normal Form (NNF): Negation appears only at leaves Example: (x+yz).y’ Counter Example: (a’.b)’+c’ Propositional Logic Decidability Complexity Theorem: Satisfiability of CNF formulas is NP-complete Theorem: Validity of DNF formulas is NP-complete Theorem: Satisfiability and Validity of arbitrary boolean formulas is NP-complete Intuition behind NP-completeness: Transformation b/w normal forms can have exponential blow-up 2SAT Satisfiability is Polynomial Time Implication Graph Notes: 1. Each clause is an implication e.g., x’+y = x y 2. Vertex for each literal in clause 3. One edge for each implication For each variable Check if there is a path from X to X’ as well as from X’ to X Path checking on graph is Poly!! Reduction of 3SAT CNF to Clique Problem on Graphs Theorem: 3SAT and above is NP-complete Note: Clique is NP-complete Are we doomed then? • No, there are efficient methods that work VERY well for large classes of formulas • We study two techniques that are the basis for widely used tools in practice • ROBDD: A compact cannonical form for arbitrary boolean functions • SAT solving: An efficient heuristic-based
[Show full text]
Existence Assumptions and Logical Principles: Choice Operators in Intuitionistic Logic
Existence Assumptions and Logical Principles: Choice Operators in Intuitionistic Logic by Corey Mulvihill A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2015 c Corey Mulvihill 2015 I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. iii Abstract Hilbert's choice operators τ and ", when added to intuitionistic logic, strengthen it. In the presence of certain extensionality axioms they produce classical logic, while in the presence of weaker decidability conditions for terms they produce various superintuitionistic intermediate logics. In this thesis, I argue that there are important philosophical lessons to be learned from these results. To make the case, I begin with a historical discussion situating the development of Hilbert's operators in relation to his evolving program in the foundations of mathematics and in relation to philosophical motivations leading to the development of intuitionistic logic. This sets the stage for a brief description of the relevant part of Dummett's program to recast debates in metaphysics, and in particular disputes about realism and anti-realism, as closely intertwined with issues in philosophical logic, with the acceptance of classical logic for a domain reflecting a commitment to realism for that domain. Then I review extant results about what is provable and what is not when one adds epsilon to intuitionistic logic, largely due to Bell and DeVidi, and I give several new proofs of intermediate logics from intuitionistic logic+" without identity.
[Show full text]
Propositional Logic: More on Normal Forms
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC: MORE ON NORMAL FORMS VL Logic, Lecture 3, WS 20/21 Armin Biere, Martina Seidl Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler University Linz PROPOSITIONAL FORMULAS: SATISFIABILITY EQUIVALENCES VL Logic Part I: Propositional Logic Recap: Semantic Equivalence Two formulas φ and are semanticly equivalent (written as φ , ) iff forall interpreta- tions [:]ν it holds that [φ]ν = [ ]ν. , is a meta-symbol, i.e., it is not part of the language. φ , iff φ $ is valid, i.e., we can express semantics by means of syntactics. If φ and are not equivalent, we write φ 6, . Example: a _:a 6, b !:b (a _ b) ^ :(a _ b) ,? a _:a , b _:b a $ (b $ c) , (a $ b) $ c 1/3 Satisfiability Equivalence Two formulas φ and are satisfiability-equivalent (written as φ ,S AT ) iff both formu- las are satisfiable or both are contradictory. Satisfiability-equivalent formulas are not necessarily satisfied by the same assignments. Satisfiability equivalence is a weaker property than semantic equivalence. Often sufficient for simplification rules: If the complicated formula is satisfiable then also the simplified formula is satisfiable. 2/3 Example: Satisfiability Equivalence positive pure literal elimination rule: If a literal x occurs in an NNF formula but :x does not occur in this formula, then x can be substituted by >. The resulting formula is satisfiability-equivalent. Example: x ,S AT >, but x 6, > (a ^ b) _ (:c ^ a) ,S AT b _:c, but (a ^ b) _ (:c ^ a) 6, b _:c 3/3 PROPOSITIONAL FORMULAS: FUNCTIONAL COMPLETENESS VL Logic Part I: Propositional Logic Examples of Semantic Equivalences (1/2) φ ^ , ^ φ φ _ , _ φ commutativity φ ^ ( ^ γ) , (φ ^ ) ^ γ φ _ ( _ γ) , (φ _ ) _ γ associativity φ ^ (φ _ ) , φ φ _ (φ ^ ) , φ absorption φ ^ ( _ γ) , (φ ^ ) _ (φ ^ γ) φ _ ( ^ γ) , (φ _ ) ^ (φ _ γ) distributivity :(φ ^ ) ,:φ _: :(φ _ ) ,:φ ^ : laws of De Morgan φ $ , (φ ! ) ^ ( ! φ) φ $ , (φ ^ ) _ (:φ ^ : ) synt.
[Show full text]
The Axiom of Choice
THE AXIOM OF CHOICE A choice function on a family S of sets is a function f with domain S such that, for each nonempty set X in S, f(X) is an element of X: figuratively put, f "chooses" an element of each member of S. If S is finite, the existence of a choice function on S is a straightforward consequence of the basic principles of set formation and the rules of classical logic. When S is infinite, however, these principles no longer suffice and so the existence of a choice function on S must be postulated. The assertion that on any family of nonempty sets — even if it be infinite —there exists at least one choice function is called the axiom of choice. This principle was first explicitly stated (in a different, but equivalent form) by Zermelo in 1904 and employed in his proof that any set can be well ordered — his famous well-ordering theorem. Its highly nonconstructive character provoked considerable initial criticism: while it asserts the possibility of making arbitrarily many arbitrary "choices" —or at least of crystallizing such an imagined procedure into a genuine function —it provides no indication whatsoever of how these "choices" are to be made, or how the resulting function is to be defined. For example, the scepticism of the French mathematician Emile Borel concerning such a possibility was sufficient to move him to declare that "any argument where one supposes an arbitrary choice a non-denumerably infinite number of times is outside the domain of mathematics." In 1938, however, Gödel established the relative consistency of the axiom of choice with respect to the usual systems of set theory, and this, coupled with its evident indispensability in the proofs of many significant mathematical theorems, eventually led to its acceptance by the majority of mathematicians.
[Show full text]
Completeness Theorems for First-Order Logic Analysed in Constructive Type Theory
Completeness Theorems for First-Order Logic Analysed in Constructive Type Theory Yannick Forster , Dominik Kirst , Dominik Wehr Saarland University, Saarland Informatics Campus, Saarbrücken, Germany {forster,kirst}@ps.uni-saarland.de [email protected] Abstract. We study various formulations of the completeness of first- order logic phrased in constructive type theory and mechanised in the Coq proof assistant. Specifically, we examine the completeness of variants of classical and intuitionistic natural deduction and sequent calculi with respect to model-theoretic, algebraic, and game semantics. As complete- ness with respect to standard model-theoretic semantics is not readily constructive, we analyse the assumptions necessary for particular syntax fragments and discuss non-standard semantics admitting assumption- free completeness. We contribute a reusable Coq library for first-order logic containing all results covered in this paper. 1 Introduction Completeness theorems are central to the field of mathematical logic. Once com- pleteness of a sound deduction system with respect to a semantic account of the syntax is established, the typically infinitary notion of semantic validity is reduced to the finitary, and hence algorithmically more tractable, notion of syntactic deduction. In the case of first-order logic, being the formalism under- lying traditional mathematics based on a set-theoretic foundation, completeness enables the use of semantic techniques to study the deductive consequence of axiomatic systems. The seminal completeness theorem for first-order logic proven by Gödel [18] and later refined by Henkin [21,20] yields a syntactic deduction of every formula valid in the canonical Tarski semantics based on interpreting the non-logical function and relation symbols in models providing the corresponding structure.
[Show full text]