Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Decision Problem and theModel Theory of First-order Logic
Richard Zach
University of Calgarywww.ucalgary.ca/rzach/
CSHPMMay 29, 2015
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 1 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Outline
1 Algebraic Approaches to Decidability
2 Decidability by Semantic Methods
3 Development of Semantic Reasoning
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 2 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Introduction
Decision Problem: find a procedure which decides afterfinitely many steps if a given formula is derivable/valid ornot
One of the fundamental problems for the development ofmodern logic in the 1920s and 1930s
Connected to:ñ Hilbert’s philosophical projectñ development of notion of decision procedure/computationñ development of model-theoretic semantics for first-order
logic
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 3 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Early Work on Propositional Logic
Attempt at a decidability prooffor propositional logic inHilbert’s 1905 lectures on logic.
Hilbert’s 1917/18 lecture coursePrinciples of Mathematicscontain a completeness prooffor propositional logic.
Proof by algebraicmanipulation; uses normalforms in essential way.
Decidability follows andsemantic completeness follows(Bernays 1918).
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 4 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The General Decision Problem
“[We require] not only the individual operations but also thepath of calculation as a whole should be specified by rules, inother words, an elimination of thinking in favor of mechanicalcalculation.
If a logical or mathematical assertion is given, the requiredprocedure should give complete instructions for determiningwhether the assertion is correct or false by a determinatecalculation after finitely many steps.
The problem thus formulated I want to call the general decisionproblem.”
Behmann, “Entscheidungsproblem und Algebra der Logik”, Göttingen, May
10, 1921
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 5 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Behmann’s Algebraic-Syntactic Proof
Result: decidability of monadicsecond-order logic
Procedure modelled onalgebraic elimination problem
Successively removesquantifiers from a given (closed)formula
Reduces truth of formula tocondition on the size of thedomain
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 6 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Hilbert and Bernays on the Decision Problem
Lectures Logische Grundlagen der Mathematik, co-taught byHilbert and Bernays, Winter 1922/23
Statement of decision problem
Discussion of importance, examples from geometry
New proof of decidability of first-order monadic logic(without =)
Proof is not algebraic, but semi-semantical:ñ If not valid, not valid in some finite individual domain with
at most 2n elementsñ Validity in a finite domain reducible to propositional
calculus
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 7 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Schönfinkel’s Original Proof
Talk given by Bernays andSchönfinkel in December 1921
Manuscript (in BernaysNachlass) from Winter term1922/23
Treats case of validity offirst-order formulas of the form(∃x)(∀y)A where A onlycontains one binary predicatesymbol
Uses infinite sums and products(like inSchröder/Löwenheim/Skolem)
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 8 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Bernays and Schönfinkel 1927
“Zum Entscheidungsproblem der mathematischen Logik”, Math.Ann. 99 (1928), submitted March 1927.
Discussion of decision problem in general, cardinalityquestions in particular
Duality of satisfiability and validity made explicit
Discussion of satisfiability and finite satisfiability(Löwenheim and Skolem)
Interpretation of predicates extensional
Proof of finite controllability of monadic class with bound(from 1922/23 lectures)
Discussion of prefix classes
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 9 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Bernays-Schönfinkel Class
Class ∃∗∀∗A now called“Bernays-Schönfinkel class”
The class ∀∗∃∗A is shown to bedecidable for validity in Bernaysand Schönfinkel 1928.
It is the preliminary “trivial”case before Bernays goes on tothe actual contribution of thepaper.
The Bernays-Schönfinkel class isnot dealt with in Schönfinkel’smanuscript.
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 10 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Schönfinkel Class
(∃x)(∀y)A with A quantifier-free and containing n binarypredicate symbols decidable for validity
Proof is by giving bound on countermodel: 2n
Schönfinkel’s manuscript gives algebraic argument
Semantic proof thus due to Bernays
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 11 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Ackermann Class
“Über die Erfüllbarkeit gewisserZählausdrücke”, Math. Ann. 100(1929), sumitted February 1928
Deals with formulas of the form∃∗∀∃∗A and satisfiability(i.e., ∀∗∃∀∗A and validity)
Emphasizes satisfiability andupper bound on model
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 12 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Ramsey Class
“On a problem of formal logic”,Proc. LMS, ser. 2, vol. 30 (1929),submitted November 1928
Deals with satisfiability offormulas of the form ∀∗A and=; sketch for ∃∗∀∗A.
Requires finite Ramsey theorem(and thus sparked Ramseytheory)
Like Behmann, focuses onspectra: sizes of domain whereformula satisfiable
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 13 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
The Development of Semantics
No clear semantics in H 1917/18
Issues:ñ Domain of quantificationñ Interpretation of predicates and predicate variablesñ Range of quantified variablesñ Open formulas
“correct [richtig]” vs. “valid [allgemeingültig]”
validity vs. satisfiability
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 14 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Behmann on Semantics: Correctness
Distinguishes predicate constants and variables
Formulas with (free) predicate variables are notpropositions [Aussagen]
Basic notion: correct (applies to 2nd order sentences only)
Russellian notion, but domain is variable
Decision problem: decide if a 2nd order sentence is correctfor every domain of individuals
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 15 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Bernays on Semantics: Notions
Formulas are schemata for propositions
They contain two variable elements:ñ domain of individuals (values of x’s)ñ predicates (values of P ’s—considered as functions from
objects to truth values)
Validity defined for a specific domain
Decision problem: Is A valid for every domain?
Dual notion: satisfiability (taken most likely from Skolem1920)
Empty domain excluded: trivial for decision problem(∀ always valid, ∃ always unsatisfiable)
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 16 / 17
Algebraic Manipulation Semantic Methods Development of Semantic Reasoning
Bernays on Semantics: Results
Validity and satisfiability are dual
If A satisfiable in domain X, it is satisfiable in any domain Ywhere Y and X have same cardinality (X finite)(Essentially a proof that isomorphism implies elementaryequivalence)
If A is satisfiable in X, then A satisfiable in any Y ⊇ X.
Richard Zach The Decision Problem May 29, 2015 17 / 17