Summary Last Lecture. Automated Reasoning. Outline of the Lecture. Definition sequent calculus. Theorem (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation)

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Summary Last Lecture. Automated Reasoning. Outline of the Lecture. Definition sequent calculus. Theorem (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation)"

Transcription

1 Summary Summary Last Lecture sequent calculus Automated Reasoning Georg Moser Institute of Computer UIBK Winter 013 (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation) let Π be a proof in minimal logic 1 a reduction sequence Π = Π 1,, Π n computable upper bound n on the maximal length of any reduction sequence Corollary if T 0 is complete and T 1, T are satisfiable extensions of T 0, then T 1 T is satisfiable GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 17/1 Summary let G be a set of universal sentences (of L) without =, then the following is equivalent 1 G is satisfiable G has a Herbrand model 3 finite G 0 Gr(G), G 0 has a Herbrand model Corollary x 1 x n G(x 1,, x n ) is valid iff there are ground terms t k 1,, tk n, k N and the following is valid: G(t 1 1,, t1 n) G(t k 1,, tk n ) formula, formula G not containing individual, nor function constants, nor = such that G GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 18/1 Summary Outline of the Lecture Propositional Logic short reminder of propositional logic, soundness and completeness theorem, natural deduction, propositional resolution irst Order Logic introduction, syntax, semantics, undecidability of first-order, Löwenheim- Skolem, compactness, model existence theorem, natural deduction, completeness, sequent calculus, normalisation Properties of irst Order Logic Craig s Interpolation, Robinson s Joint Consistency, Herbrand s Limits and xtensions of irst Order Logic, Curry-Howard Isomorphism, Limits, Second-Order Logic GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 19/1

2 Background: Russel s paradox according to naive set theory, any definable collection is a set; this is not a good idea Proof 1 let R := {x x x} as x x is a definition (= a predicate) this should be set 3 so either R R, or R R, but R R R R R R R R 4 hence R R R R, which is a contradiction 5 thus naive set theory is inconsistent Oops, what to do? Brouwer s Way Out (174) Change Mathematics! intuitionistic logic is a restriction of classical logic, where certain formulas are no longer derivable for example A A is no longer valid its interpretation in intuitionistic logic is: there is an argument for A or there is a argument for A (= from the assumption A we can prove a contradiction) GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 130/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 131/1 A Problem with the xcluded Middle solutions of the equation x y = z with x and y irrational and z rational Proof 1 is an irrational number one of the following two cases has to occur: is rational, then is irrational, then x = y = z = x = y = z = ( ) = = prototypical example of a non-constructive proof : i introduction : i : i elimination : e G G : i G : e : e : e GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 13/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 133/1

3 Remark note the absence of introduction elimination : i : e : e : e (Alternative) an equivalent formalisation of intutitionistic logic is given by sequent calculus with the following restriction: sequents Γ : 1 (Brower, Heyting, Kolmogorow (Kreisel) Interpretation) an argument for is an argument for and an argument for is an argument of or an argument for is a transformation of an argument for into an argument for is interpreted as no argument for can exist the formal definition needs Kripke models GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 134/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 135/1 Kripke Models a frame is a pair (W, ), where W denotes a nonempty set of worlds and denotes a preorder on W a Kripke model on a frame = (W, ) is a triple K = (W,, (A p ) p W ) such that for all p: 1 A p = (A p, a p ) A p is a non-empty set (the domain in world p) 3 A p is a mapping that associates predicate constants to domains predicate symbols P, p, q W, (a 1,, a n ) A n p: p q, A p = P(a 1,, a n ) implies A q = P(a 1,, a n ) we set A = p W A p Convention suppose (x 1,, x n ) is formula with free variables x 1,, x n ; we write (a 1,, a n ) for the interpretation of x i by a i A in for a given Kripke model K = (W,, (A p ) p W ) the satisfaction relation is defined as follows: K, p K, p K, p P(a 1,, a n ) if A p = P(a 1,, a n ) K, p A B iff K, p A and K, p B K, p A B iff K, p A or K, p B K, p A B iff for all q p: K, q A implies K, q B a formula is valid in K if K, p for all p W GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 136/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 137/1

4 Some Transfer Results Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus Natural Deduction for Minimal Logic natural deduction (and the sequent calculus) for intuitionistic logic is sound and complete introduction A A elimination natural deduction is strongly normalising sequent calculus admits cut-eliminiation Γ Γ Γ Γ, G Γ, G Γ G Craig s interpolation theoremm holds for intutitionistic logic Γ, Γ GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 138/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 139/1 Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus A Sequent Calculus for Minimal Logic left right, Γ C, Γ C : l Γ 1 Γ Γ 1, Γ, Γ C, Γ C : l, Γ 1 C, Γ C, Γ 1, Γ C : l : r Γ : r Γ 1, Γ C, Γ 1, Γ C : l Γ, : l : r Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus Lemma let S = (Γ C) be a sequent; proof Π of S in natural deduction iff proof Ψ of S in the sequent calculus Proof direction from left to right is shown by induction on the length of Π, ie, on the number of sequents in Π 1 the base case is immediate as Π A A iff Ψ A A for the step case, consider the case that Π has the following form: Π 0 by induction hypothesis a sequent calculus proof Ψ 0 of GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 140/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 141/1

5 Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus Proof (cont d) 3 the following is a correct proof: Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus Natural Deduction Structural Rules Ψ 0 : l cut 4 all other cases are similar the other direction follows by induction on the length of Ψ contraction weakening A, A, Γ C A, Γ C Γ C A, Γ C Question is this really correct? Answer no, we forgot about the structural rules in the direction from right to left Observations note the restriction to one formula in the succedent contraction and weakening can also be represented by changed axioms and representation of sequents GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 14/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 143/1 Natural Deduction vs Sequent Calculus Outline of the Lecture Propositional Logic short reminder of propositional logic, soundness and completeness theorem, natural deduction, propositional resolution irst Order Logic introduction, syntax, semantics, undecidability of first-order, Löwenheim- Skolem, compactness, model existence theorem, natural deduction, completeness, sequent calculus, normalisation Properties of irst Order Logic Craig s Interpolation, Robinson s Joint Consistency, Herbrand s Limits and xtensions of irst Order Logic, Curry-Howard Isomorphism, Second-Order Logic Typed λ-calculus Typed λ-calculus (types and terms) we define the set of types T and typed λ-terms as follows: a variable type: α,, γ, if σ, τ are types, then (σ τ) is a (product) type if σ, τ are types, then (σ τ) is a (function) type any (typed) variable x : σ is a (typed) term if M : σ, N : τ are terms, then M, N : σ τ is a term if M : σ τ is a term, then fst(m) : σ and snd(m) : τ are terms if M : τ is a term, x : σ a variable, then the abstraction (λx σ M) : σ τ is a term if M : σ τ, N : σ are terms, then the application (MN) : τ is a term GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 144/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 145/1

6 Typed λ-calculus Typed λ-calculus the following are (well-formed, typed) terms λfxfx : (σ τ) σ τ λxx, λyy : (σ σ) (τ τ) but λxxx cannot be typed! the set of free variables of a term is defined as follows V(x) = {x} V(λxM) = V(M) {x} V(MN) = V( M, N ) = V(M) V(N) V(fst(M)) = V(snd(M)) = V(M) (informal) occurrences of x in the scope of λ are called bound GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 146/1 (substitution) M[x := N] denotes the result of substituting N for x in M x[x := N] = N and if x y, then y[x := N] = y (λxm)[x := N] = λxm (λym)[x := N] = λy(m[x := N]), if x y and y V(N) (M 1 M )[x := N] = (M 1 [x := N])(M [x := N]) M 1, M [x := N] = M 1 [x := N], M [x := N] fst(m)[x := N] = fst(m[x := N]) snd(m)[x := N] = snd(m[x := N]) (-reduction) (λxm)n M[x := N] fst( M, N ) M snd( M, N ) N GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 147/1 Typed λ-calculus Lemma -reduction is closed under context: LM LN ML NL λxm λxn M N = M, L N, L L, M L, N fst(m) fst(n) snd(m) snd(n) (λf λxfx)(λxx + 1)0 (λx(λxx + 1)x)0 (λxx + 1)0 1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 148/1 Curry-Howard Isomorphism Type Checking Γ M : σ Γ N : τ Γ M, N : σ τ Remarks x : σ, Γ x : σ ref pair Γ M : σ τ Γ fst(m) : σ fst Γ M : σ τ Γ snd(m) : τ snd Γ, x : σ M : τ Γ λxm : σ τ abs Γ M : σ τ Γ N : σ Γ MN : τ 1 different to type checking system in functional programming we have type assignment for product types weakening is incorporated into the axiom, sequents arepresented as sets GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 149/1 app

7 Types as ormulas Types as ormulas (Types as ormulas) (ref) (Ax) + structural rules (pair) ( : i) (abs) ( : i) (fst) ( : e) (app) ( : e) (snd) ( : e) Question what is the correspondence to? Answer sum types! a (binary) sum type describes a set of values drawn from exactly two given types GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 150/1 Types as ormulas Type System for Sum Types Γ M : σ Γ inl(m) : σ + τ Γ N : τ Γ inr(n) : σ + τ Γ M : σ + τ Γ, x : σ N 1 : γ Γ, y : τ N : γ Γ case M of inl(x) N 1 inr(y) N : γ (-reduction, cont d) (λxm)n M[x := N] fst( M, N ) snd( M, N ) M N case inl(m) of inl(x) N 1 inr(y) N N1 [x := M] case inr(n) of inl(x) N 1 inr(y) N N [y := N] GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 151/1 Types as ormulas Curry-Howard Correspondence Proofs as Programs Proofs as Programs (Types as ormulas (cont d)) (ref) (Ax) + structural rules (pair) ( : i) (abs) ( : i) (fst) ( : e) (app) ( : e) (snd) ( : e) (inl) ( : i) (inr) ( : i) (case) ( : e) (Curry-Howard) (normalisation) Π 1 Π Γ M : σ Γ N : τ Γ M, N : σ τ Γ fst( M, N ) : σ = Π 1 Γ M : σ the Curry-Howard correspondence (aka Curry-Howard isomorophism) consists of the following parts: 1 formulas = types proof = programs 3 normalisation = computation (-reduction) fst( M, N ) M GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 15/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 153/1

8 Proofs as Programs Proofs as Programs (normalisation) Π 1 Γ, x : σ M : τ Γ λxm : σ τ Γ (λxm)n : τ Π Γ N : σ = Π 1 [x\π ] Γ M[x := N] : τ Discussion act the Curry-Howard correspondence extends to many systems, for example intuitionistic logic and λ-calculus Hilbert axioms and combinatory logic linear logic and interaction nets the proof Π 1 [x\π ] represents the proof obtained from Π 1 by substituting Π into Π 1 instead of the use of ref wrt x (-reduction) (λxm)n M Observations the Curry-Howard correspondence 1 links logic with programming, ie, provides an explanation for the sucess of logic in computer science allows to mutual enrich both areas 3 provides a formally verified form of programming 4 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 154/1 GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 155/1 Proofs as Programs strong normalisation of simply typed λ-calculus is typically proved via strong normalisation of minimal logic similarily, undecidablilty of type inhabitation of dependent types follows from undeciabilty of intuitionistic predicate logic correspondencence between interaction nets and linear logic provides type system to interaction nets formalisation of the theory of forbidden patterns for rewrite strategies in Isabelle provides a machine-checked theory code export from Isabelle provides OCaml code that has been integrated into T T T GM (Institute of Computer UIBK) Automated Reasoning 156/1

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS 1 Introduction Proof systems are built to prove statements. They can be thought as an inference machine with special statements, called provable statements, or sometimes

Schedule. Logic (master program) Literature & Online Material. gic. Time and Place. Literature. Exercises & Exam. Online Material

OLC mputational gic Schedule Time and Place Thursday, 8:15 9:45, HS E Logic (master program) Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK week 1 October 2 week 8 November 20 week 2 October 9 week 9

Summary of Last Lecture. Automated Reasoning. Outline of the Lecture. Definition. Example. Lemma non-redundant superposition inferences are liftable

Summary Automated Reasoning Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK Summary of Last Lecture C A D B (C D)σ C s = t D A[s ] (C D A[t])σ ORe OPm(L) C s = t D u[s ] v SpL (C D u[t] v)σ C s t Cσ ERR

Finite Sets. Theorem 5.1. Two non-empty finite sets have the same cardinality if and only if they are equivalent.

MATH 337 Cardinality Dr. Neal, WKU We now shall prove that the rational numbers are a countable set while R is uncountable. This result shows that there are two different magnitudes of infinity. But we

Foundational Proof Certificates

An application of proof theory to computer science INRIA-Saclay & LIX, École Polytechnique CUSO Winter School, Proof and Computation 30 January 2013 Can we standardize, communicate, and trust formal proofs?

MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION. Mathematical Induction. This is a powerful method to prove properties of positive integers.

MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION MIGUEL A LERMA (Last updated: February 8, 003) Mathematical Induction This is a powerful method to prove properties of positive integers Principle of Mathematical Induction Let P

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs Rules of Inference Section 1.6 Section Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Using Rules of Inference to Build Arguments

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1. First Order Logic. This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine.

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1 First Order Logic This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine. Our version of first-order logic will use the following symbols: variables connectives (,,,,

A Propositional Dynamic Logic for CCS Programs

A Propositional Dynamic Logic for CCS Programs Mario R. F. Benevides and L. Menasché Schechter {mario,luis}@cos.ufrj.br Abstract This work presents a Propositional Dynamic Logic in which the programs are

Mathematical Induction

Mathematical Induction Victor Adamchik Fall of 2005 Lecture 2 (out of three) Plan 1. Strong Induction 2. Faulty Inductions 3. Induction and the Least Element Principal Strong Induction Fibonacci Numbers

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees George Metcalfe Mathematics Institute University of Bern LATD 2014, Vienna Summer of Logic, 15-19 July 2014 George Metcalfe (University of Bern) First-Order Logics

Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI

1 Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI DOMINIQUE LARCHEY-WENDLING, LORIA CNRS, Nancy, France DIDIER GALMICHE, LORIA Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy, France We solve the open

Lecture 13 of 41. More Propositional and Predicate Logic

Lecture 13 of 41 More Propositional and Predicate Logic Monday, 20 September 2004 William H. Hsu, KSU http://www.kddresearch.org http://www.cis.ksu.edu/~bhsu Reading: Sections 8.1-8.3, Russell and Norvig

CS510 Software Engineering

CS510 Software Engineering Propositional Logic Asst. Prof. Mathias Payer Department of Computer Science Purdue University TA: Scott A. Carr Slides inspired by Xiangyu Zhang http://nebelwelt.net/teaching/15-cs510-se

Automated Theorem Proving - summary of lecture 1

Automated Theorem Proving - summary of lecture 1 1 Introduction Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) deals with the development of computer programs that show that some statement is a logical consequence of

Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning

Math 101 Rumbos Spring 2010 1 Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning 1 Propositional Logic A proposition is a mathematical statement that it is either true or false; that is, a statement whose certainty or

Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica. Tanmay Jaipurkar

Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica Tanmay Jaipurkar October 21, 2013 Abstract The fallowing paper discusses the inconsistency and undecidable preposition of Principia

Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm

Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm Lecture notes prepared for MATH 326, Spring 997 Department of Mathematics and Statistics University at Albany William F Hammond Table of Contents Introduction

Mathematical Induction. Lecture 10-11

Mathematical Induction Lecture 10-11 Menu Mathematical Induction Strong Induction Recursive Definitions Structural Induction Climbing an Infinite Ladder Suppose we have an infinite ladder: 1. We can reach

APPLICATIONS OF THE ORDER FUNCTION

APPLICATIONS OF THE ORDER FUNCTION LECTURE NOTES: MATH 432, CSUSM, SPRING 2009. PROF. WAYNE AITKEN In this lecture we will explore several applications of order functions including formulas for GCDs and

ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE YEREVAN STATE UNIVERSITY Physical and Mathematical Sciences 2012 1 p. 43 48 ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS I nf or m at i cs L. A. HAYKAZYAN * Chair of Programming and Information

13 Infinite Sets. 13.1 Injections, Surjections, and Bijections. mcs-ftl 2010/9/8 0:40 page 379 #385

mcs-ftl 2010/9/8 0:40 page 379 #385 13 Infinite Sets So you might be wondering how much is there to say about an infinite set other than, well, it has an infinite number of elements. Of course, an infinite

3. Mathematical Induction

3. MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION 83 3. Mathematical Induction 3.1. First Principle of Mathematical Induction. Let P (n) be a predicate with domain of discourse (over) the natural numbers N = {0, 1,,...}. If (1)

AN INTUITIONISTIC EPISTEMIC LOGIC FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION. Yoichi Hirai. A Master Thesis

AN INTUITIONISTIC EPISTEMIC LOGIC FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION by Yoichi Hirai A Master Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Tokyo on February 10, 2010 in Partial Fulfillment

PROOFS AND TYPES JEAN-YVES GIRARD PAUL TAYLOR YVES LAFONT. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge. Translated and with appendices by

PROOFS AND TYPES JEAN-YVES GIRARD Translated and with appendices by PAUL TAYLOR YVES LAFONT CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge New York Melbourne New Rochelle Sydney ii Published by the Press Syndicate

Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces

Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces D. R. Wilkins Academic Year 1996-7 9 Vector Spaces A vector space over some field K is an algebraic structure consisting of a set V on which are

4 Domain Relational Calculus

4 Domain Relational Calculus We now present two relational calculi that we will compare to RA. First, what is the difference between an algebra and a calculus? The usual story is that the algebra RA is

MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms.

MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms. This text is based on the following books: Fundamental concepts of topology by Peter O Neil Elements of Mathematics: General Topology by Nicolas Bourbaki Counterexamples

PART I. THE REAL NUMBERS

PART I. THE REAL NUMBERS This material assumes that you are already familiar with the real number system and the representation of the real numbers as points on the real line. I.1. THE NATURAL NUMBERS

FIRST YEAR CALCULUS. Chapter 7 CONTINUITY. It is a parabola, and we can draw this parabola without lifting our pencil from the paper.

FIRST YEAR CALCULUS WWLCHENW L c WWWL W L Chen, 1982, 2008. 2006. This chapter originates from material used by the author at Imperial College, University of London, between 1981 and 1990. It It is is

Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump. Theodore A. Slaman. University of California, Berkeley. CJuly, 2005

Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump Theodore A. Slaman University of California, Berkeley CJuly, 2005 Outline Lecture 1 Forcing in arithmetic Coding and decoding theorems Automorphisms of countable

ON THE DEGREE OF MAXIMALITY OF DEFINITIONALLY COMPLETE LOGICS

Bulletin of the Section of Logic Volume 15/2 (1986), pp. 72 79 reedition 2005 [original edition, pp. 72 84] Ryszard Ladniak ON THE DEGREE OF MAXIMALITY OF DEFINITIONALLY COMPLETE LOGICS The following definition

CARDINALITY, COUNTABLE AND UNCOUNTABLE SETS PART ONE

CARDINALITY, COUNTABLE AND UNCOUNTABLE SETS PART ONE With the notion of bijection at hand, it is easy to formalize the idea that two finite sets have the same number of elements: we just need to verify

2.1 Sets, power sets. Cartesian Products.

Lecture 8 2.1 Sets, power sets. Cartesian Products. Set is an unordered collection of objects. - used to group objects together, - often the objects with similar properties This description of a set (without

Introduction to Finite Fields (cont.)

Chapter 6 Introduction to Finite Fields (cont.) 6.1 Recall Theorem. Z m is a field m is a prime number. Theorem (Subfield Isomorphic to Z p ). Every finite field has the order of a power of a prime number

Parametric Domain-theoretic models of Linear Abadi & Plotkin Logic

Parametric Domain-theoretic models of Linear Abadi & Plotkin Logic Lars Birkedal Rasmus Ejlers Møgelberg Rasmus Lerchedahl Petersen IT University Technical Report Series TR-00-7 ISSN 600 600 February 00

Ultraproducts and Applications I

Ultraproducts and Applications I Brent Cody Virginia Commonwealth University September 2, 2013 Outline Background of the Hyperreals Filters and Ultrafilters Construction of the Hyperreals The Transfer

Research Note. Bi-intuitionistic Boolean Bunched Logic

UCL DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE Research Note RN/14/06 Bi-intuitionistic Boolean Bunched Logic June, 2014 James Brotherston Dept. of Computer Science University College London Jules Villard Dept. of

Chapter 4, Arithmetic in F [x] Polynomial arithmetic and the division algorithm.

Chapter 4, Arithmetic in F [x] Polynomial arithmetic and the division algorithm. We begin by defining the ring of polynomials with coefficients in a ring R. After some preliminary results, we specialize

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2

CS 70 Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2 Proofs Intuitively, the concept of proof should already be familiar We all like to assert things, and few of us

4. CLASSES OF RINGS 4.1. Classes of Rings class operator A-closed Example 1: product Example 2:

4. CLASSES OF RINGS 4.1. Classes of Rings Normally we associate, with any property, a set of objects that satisfy that property. But problems can arise when we allow sets to be elements of larger sets

Bindings, mobility of bindings, and the -quantifier

ICMS, 26 May 2007 1/17 Bindings, mobility of bindings, and the -quantifier Dale Miller, INRIA-Saclay and LIX, École Polytechnique This talk is based on papers with Tiu in LICS2003 & ACM ToCL, and experience

Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA 3033-009

Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA 3033-009 Instructor: Thomas Wies Spring 2013 Lecture 11 Semantics of Programming Languages Denotational Semantics Meaning of a program is defined as the mathematical

GREATEST COMMON DIVISOR

DEFINITION: GREATEST COMMON DIVISOR The greatest common divisor (gcd) of a and b, denoted by (a, b), is the largest common divisor of integers a and b. THEOREM: If a and b are nonzero integers, then their

POWER SETS AND RELATIONS

POWER SETS AND RELATIONS L. MARIZZA A. BAILEY 1. The Power Set Now that we have defined sets as best we can, we can consider a sets of sets. If we were to assume nothing, except the existence of the empty

Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm

Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm Andrew D. Lewis 2009/03/16 Abstract Subsets of a Euclidean domain are characterised with the following objectives: (1) ensuring uniqueness

INTRODUCTORY SET THEORY

M.Sc. program in mathematics INTRODUCTORY SET THEORY Katalin Károlyi Department of Applied Analysis, Eötvös Loránd University H-1088 Budapest, Múzeum krt. 6-8. CONTENTS 1. SETS Set, equal sets, subset,

CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZERO SUM PROBLEMS

CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZERO SUM PROBLEMS S. D. ADHIKARI, Y. G. CHEN, J. B. FRIEDLANDER, S. V. KONYAGIN AND F. PAPPALARDI Abstract. A prototype of zero sum theorems, the well known theorem of Erdős, Ginzburg

MAP-I Programa Doutoral em Informática. Rigorous Software Development

MAP-I Programa Doutoral em Informática Rigorous Software Development Unidade Curricular em Teoria e Fundamentos Theory and Foundations (UCTF) DI-UM, DCC-FCUP May, 2012 Abstract This text presents a UCTF

DEFINABLE TYPES IN PRESBURGER ARITHMETIC

DEFINABLE TYPES IN PRESBURGER ARITHMETIC GABRIEL CONANT Abstract. We consider the first order theory of (Z, +,

o-minimality and Uniformity in n 1 Graphs

o-minimality and Uniformity in n 1 Graphs Reid Dale July 10, 2013 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Languages and Structures 2 3 Definability and Tame Geometry 4 4 Applications to n 1 Graphs 6 5 Further Directions

it is easy to see that α = a

21. Polynomial rings Let us now turn out attention to determining the prime elements of a polynomial ring, where the coefficient ring is a field. We already know that such a polynomial ring is a UF. Therefore

Correspondence analysis for strong three-valued logic

Correspondence analysis for strong three-valued logic A. Tamminga abstract. I apply Kooi and Tamminga s (2012) idea of correspondence analysis for many-valued logics to strong three-valued logic (K 3 ).

E3: PROBABILITY AND STATISTICS lecture notes

E3: PROBABILITY AND STATISTICS lecture notes 2 Contents 1 PROBABILITY THEORY 7 1.1 Experiments and random events............................ 7 1.2 Certain event. Impossible event............................

No: 10 04. Bilkent University. Monotonic Extension. Farhad Husseinov. Discussion Papers. Department of Economics

No: 10 04 Bilkent University Monotonic Extension Farhad Husseinov Discussion Papers Department of Economics The Discussion Papers of the Department of Economics are intended to make the initial results

Degrees of Truth: the formal logic of classical and quantum probabilities as well as fuzzy sets.

Degrees of Truth: the formal logic of classical and quantum probabilities as well as fuzzy sets. Logic is the study of reasoning. A language of propositions is fundamental to this study as well as true

Basic Concepts of Point Set Topology Notes for OU course Math 4853 Spring 2011

Basic Concepts of Point Set Topology Notes for OU course Math 4853 Spring 2011 A. Miller 1. Introduction. The definitions of metric space and topological space were developed in the early 1900 s, largely

GROUPS ACTING ON A SET

GROUPS ACTING ON A SET MATH 435 SPRING 2012 NOTES FROM FEBRUARY 27TH, 2012 1. Left group actions Definition 1.1. Suppose that G is a group and S is a set. A left (group) action of G on S is a rule for

H/wk 13, Solutions to selected problems

H/wk 13, Solutions to selected problems Ch. 4.1, Problem 5 (a) Find the number of roots of x x in Z 4, Z Z, any integral domain, Z 6. (b) Find a commutative ring in which x x has infinitely many roots.

! " # The Logic of Descriptions. Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation. Terminology. Overview. Three Basic Features. Some History on DLs

,!0((,.+#\$),%\$(-&.& *,2(-\$)%&2.'3&%!&, Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Alessandro Agostini agostini@dit.unitn.it University of Trento Fausto Giunchiglia fausto@dit.unitn.it The Logic of Descriptions!\$%&'()*\$#)

Fixed-Point Logics and Computation

1 Fixed-Point Logics and Computation Symposium on the Unusual Effectiveness of Logic in Computer Science University of Cambridge 2 Mathematical Logic Mathematical logic seeks to formalise the process of

Theory of Automated Reasoning An Introduction. Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

Theory of Automated Reasoning An Introduction Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho Intended as compulsory reading for the Spring 2004 course on Automated Reasononing at Department of Mathematical Information Technology,

Set theory as a foundation for mathematics

Set theory as a foundation for mathematics Waffle Mathcamp 2011 In school we are taught about numbers, but we never learn what numbers really are. We learn rules of arithmetic, but we never learn why these

WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT?

WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT? introduction Many students seem to have trouble with the notion of a mathematical proof. People that come to a course like Math 216, who certainly

Some Polynomial Theorems. John Kennedy Mathematics Department Santa Monica College 1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 rkennedy@ix.netcom.

Some Polynomial Theorems by John Kennedy Mathematics Department Santa Monica College 1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 rkennedy@ix.netcom.com This paper contains a collection of 31 theorems, lemmas,

Basic Proof Techniques

Basic Proof Techniques David Ferry dsf43@truman.edu September 13, 010 1 Four Fundamental Proof Techniques When one wishes to prove the statement P Q there are four fundamental approaches. This document

Foundations of Logic and Mathematics

Yves Nievergelt Foundations of Logic and Mathematics Applications to Computer Science and Cryptography Birkhäuser Boston Basel Berlin Contents Preface Outline xiii xv A Theory 1 0 Boolean Algebraic Logic

Solving Linear Systems, Continued and The Inverse of a Matrix

, Continued and The of a Matrix Calculus III Summer 2013, Session II Monday, July 15, 2013 Agenda 1. The rank of a matrix 2. The inverse of a square matrix Gaussian Gaussian solves a linear system by reducing

Answer Key for California State Standards: Algebra I

Algebra I: Symbolic reasoning and calculations with symbols are central in algebra. Through the study of algebra, a student develops an understanding of the symbolic language of mathematics and the sciences.

Cartesian Products and Relations

Cartesian Products and Relations Definition (Cartesian product) If A and B are sets, the Cartesian product of A and B is the set A B = {(a, b) :(a A) and (b B)}. The following points are worth special

Vocabulary Words and Definitions for Algebra

Name: Period: Vocabulary Words and s for Algebra Absolute Value Additive Inverse Algebraic Expression Ascending Order Associative Property Axis of Symmetry Base Binomial Coefficient Combine Like Terms

A Problem With The Rational Numbers

Solvability of Equations Solvability of Equations 1. In fields, linear equations ax + b = 0 are solvable. Solvability of Equations 1. In fields, linear equations ax + b = 0 are solvable. 2. Quadratic equations

Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics. Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics

Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics An Introductory Single Variable Real Analysis: A Learning Approach through Problem Solving Marcel B. Finan c All Rights

On the generation of elliptic curves with 16 rational torsion points by Pythagorean triples

On the generation of elliptic curves with 16 rational torsion points by Pythagorean triples Brian Hilley Boston College MT695 Honors Seminar March 3, 2006 1 Introduction 1.1 Mazur s Theorem Let C be a

2.3 Convex Constrained Optimization Problems

42 CHAPTER 2. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN CONVEX OPTIMIZATION Theorem 15 Let f : R n R and h : R R. Consider g(x) = h(f(x)) for all x R n. The function g is convex if either of the following two conditions

Software Modeling and Verification

Software Modeling and Verification Alessandro Aldini DiSBeF - Sezione STI University of Urbino Carlo Bo Italy 3-4 February 2015 Algorithmic verification Correctness problem Is the software/hardware system

This chapter is all about cardinality of sets. At first this looks like a

CHAPTER Cardinality of Sets This chapter is all about cardinality of sets At first this looks like a very simple concept To find the cardinality of a set, just count its elements If A = { a, b, c, d },

Computational Methods for Database Repair by Signed Formulae

Computational Methods for Database Repair by Signed Formulae Ofer Arieli (oarieli@mta.ac.il) Department of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel-Aviv, 4 Antokolski street, Tel-Aviv 61161, Israel.

1 if 1 x 0 1 if 0 x 1

Chapter 3 Continuity In this chapter we begin by defining the fundamental notion of continuity for real valued functions of a single real variable. When trying to decide whether a given function is or

DEGREES OF CATEGORICITY AND THE HYPERARITHMETIC HIERARCHY

DEGREES OF CATEGORICITY AND THE HYPERARITHMETIC HIERARCHY BARBARA F. CSIMA, JOHANNA N. Y. FRANKLIN, AND RICHARD A. SHORE Abstract. We study arithmetic and hyperarithmetic degrees of categoricity. We extend

Algorithmic Software Verification

Algorithmic Software Verification (LTL Model Checking) Azadeh Farzan What is Verification Anyway? Proving (in a formal way) that program satisfies a specification written in a logical language. Formal

Sets and Cardinality Notes for C. F. Miller

Sets and Cardinality Notes for 620-111 C. F. Miller Semester 1, 2000 Abstract These lecture notes were compiled in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics in the University of Melbourne for the use

The Dirichlet Unit Theorem

Chapter 6 The Dirichlet Unit Theorem As usual, we will be working in the ring B of algebraic integers of a number field L. Two factorizations of an element of B are regarded as essentially the same if

Bi-approximation Semantics for Substructural Logic at Work

Bi-approximation Semantics for Substructural Logic at Work Tomoyuki Suzuki Department of Computer Science, University of Leicester Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom tomoyuki.suzuki@mcs.le.ac.uk Abstract

= 2 + 1 2 2 = 3 4, Now assume that P (k) is true for some fixed k 2. This means that

Instructions. Answer each of the questions on your own paper, and be sure to show your work so that partial credit can be adequately assessed. Credit will not be given for answers (even correct ones) without

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET Automated Theorem Proving av Tom Everitt 2010 - No 8 MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET, 106 91 STOCKHOLM

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. Harper Langston New York University

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof Harper Langston New York University Proof and Counterexample Discovery and proof Even and odd numbers number n from Z is called

Scalable Automated Symbolic Analysis of Administrative Role-Based Access Control Policies by SMT solving

Scalable Automated Symbolic Analysis of Administrative Role-Based Access Control Policies by SMT solving Alessandro Armando 1,2 and Silvio Ranise 2, 1 DIST, Università degli Studi di Genova, Italia 2 Security

Chapter ML:IV. IV. Statistical Learning. Probability Basics Bayes Classification Maximum a-posteriori Hypotheses

Chapter ML:IV IV. Statistical Learning Probability Basics Bayes Classification Maximum a-posteriori Hypotheses ML:IV-1 Statistical Learning STEIN 2005-2015 Area Overview Mathematics Statistics...... Stochastics

Type Theory & Functional Programming

Type Theory & Functional Programming Simon Thompson Computing Laboratory, University of Kent March 1999 c Simon Thompson, 1999 Not to be reproduced i ii To my parents Preface Constructive Type theory has

INCIDENCE-BETWEENNESS GEOMETRY

INCIDENCE-BETWEENNESS GEOMETRY MATH 410, CSUSM. SPRING 2008. PROFESSOR AITKEN This document covers the geometry that can be developed with just the axioms related to incidence and betweenness. The full

Notes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory. 1 Walrasian Equilibrium and Excess Demand

Notes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory In this lecture we go on considering a general equilibrium model of a private ownership economy. In contrast to the Notes IV, we focus on positive issues such

1 = (a 0 + b 0 α) 2 + + (a m 1 + b m 1 α) 2. for certain elements a 0,..., a m 1, b 0,..., b m 1 of F. Multiplying out, we obtain

Notes on real-closed fields These notes develop the algebraic background needed to understand the model theory of real-closed fields. To understand these notes, a standard graduate course in algebra is

Dedekind s forgotten axiom and why we should teach it (and why we shouldn t teach mathematical induction in our calculus classes)

Dedekind s forgotten axiom and why we should teach it (and why we shouldn t teach mathematical induction in our calculus classes) by Jim Propp (UMass Lowell) March 14, 2010 1 / 29 Completeness Three common

2. The Language of First-order Logic

2. The Language of First-order Logic KR & R Brachman & Levesque 2005 17 Declarative language Before building system before there can be learning, reasoning, planning, explanation... need to be able to

This asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.

3. Axioms of Set theory Before presenting the axioms of set theory, we first make a few basic comments about the relevant first order logic. We will give a somewhat more detailed discussion later, but

Logic, Algebra and Truth Degrees 2008. Siena. A characterization of rst order rational Pavelka's logic

Logic, Algebra and Truth Degrees 2008 September 8-11, 2008 Siena A characterization of rst order rational Pavelka's logic Xavier Caicedo Universidad de los Andes, Bogota Under appropriate formulations,

Proofs are short works of prose and need to be written in complete sentences, with mathematical symbols used where appropriate.

Advice for homework: Proofs are short works of prose and need to be written in complete sentences, with mathematical symbols used where appropriate. Even if a problem is a simple exercise that doesn t