unified classical logic completeness
play

Unified Classical Logic Completeness A Coinductive Pearl Jasmin - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 22, 2022 •210 likes •750 views

Unified Classical Logic Completeness A Coinductive Pearl Jasmin Blanchette Andrei Popescu Dmitriy Traytel Isabelle H O L = All too often, proof-theoretic methods are neglected in favor of shorter, and superficially

  1. Unified Classical Logic Completeness A Coinductive Pearl Jasmin Blanchette Andrei Popescu Dmitriy Traytel Isabelle H O L ∀ = α λ β →

  3. All too often, proof-theoretic methods are neglected in favor of shorter, and superficially more elegant semantic arguments. [In contrast, in Gallier’s book] the treatment of the proof theory of the Gentzen system is oriented towards computation with proofs. For example, a pseudo-Pascal version of a complete search procedure for first-order cut-free Gentzen proofs is presented. Frank Pfenning

  4. A Proof ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  5. A Proof ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  6. A Proof ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  7. A Proof A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  8. A Proof A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( z ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , z ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  9. A Proof A X p ( y ) A X p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( z ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , z ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  10. A Failing Proof A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  11. A Failing Proof A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  12. A Failing Proof ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  13. A Failing Proof . . . A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  14. A Systematic Proof A X p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( z ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , z ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , x ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  15. A Failing Systematic Proof . . . A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( z ) ⊢ q ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , z ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ q ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A X p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( x ) ⊢ q ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , x ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ q ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ q ( z )

  16. Our Interest in Gallier’s Proof − → Monomorphic FOL − → Untyped FOL Polymorphic FOL � �� � � �� � � �� � TFF1 TFF0 FOF

  17. Our Interest in Gallier’s Proof − → Monomorphic FOL − → Untyped FOL Polymorphic FOL � �� � � �� � � �� � TFF1 TFF0 FOF Claessen, Lillieström, Smallbone CADE 2011 Blanchette, Böhme, Popescu, Smallbone TACAS 2013

  18. Our Interest in Gallier’s Proof − → Monomorphic FOL − → Untyped FOL Polymorphic FOL � �� � � �� � � �� � TFF1 TFF0 FOF Claessen, Lillieström, Smallbone CADE 2011 Blanchette, Böhme, Popescu, Smallbone TACAS 2013 Blanchette, Popescu FroCoS 2013

  19. How to Formalize Completeness? Harrison TPHOLs 1998 HOL Light Henkin Berghofer 2002 Isabelle/HOL Henkin Ridge, Margetson TPHOLs 2005 Isabelle/HOL Beth–Hintikka Ilik 2010 Coq Henkin Schlöder, Koepke 2012 Mizar Henkin Henkin ≈ Gödel ≈ canonical models ≈ semantic Beth–Hintikka ≈ Gallier ≈ complete prover ≈ syntactic

  20. How to Formalize Completeness? Harrison TPHOLs 1998 HOL Light Henkin Berghofer 2002 Isabelle/HOL Henkin Ridge, Margetson TPHOLs 2005 Isabelle/HOL Beth–Hintikka Ilik 2010 Coq Henkin Schlöder, Koepke 2012 Mizar Henkin Henkin ≈ Gödel ≈ canonical models ≈ semantic Beth–Hintikka ≈ Gallier ≈ complete prover ≈ syntactic

  21. Our Version • Isabelle/HOL, Beth–Hintikka • Abstract proof + instantiation with rich FOLs • Codatatype of possibly infinite trees • Code generation to Haskell

  22. Our Version • Isabelle/HOL, Beth–Hintikka • Abstract proof + instantiation with rich FOLs • Codatatype of possibly infinite trees • Code generation to Haskell A A pseudo-Pascal version of a complete search procedure for first-order cut-free Gentzen proofs is presented.

  23. Our Version • Isabelle/HOL, Beth–Hintikka • Abstract proof + instantiation with rich FOLs • Codatatype of possibly infinite trees • Code generation to Haskell A Haskell A pseudo-Pascal ——————– version of a complete search procedure for first-order cut-free Gentzen proofs is presented.

  24. Isabelle/HOL Demonstration

  25. Codatatypes Inductive (or algebraic) datatypes: datatype α list = Nil | Cons α ( α list )

  26. Codatatypes Inductive (or algebraic) datatypes: datatype α list = Nil | Cons α ( α list ) Theorems: Distinctness, injectivity, exhaustiveness, induction

  27. Codatatypes Inductive (or algebraic) datatypes: datatype α list = Nil | Cons α ( α list ) Theorems: Distinctness, injectivity, exhaustiveness, induction Coinductive (or coalgebraic) datatypes: codatatype α llist = LNil | LCons α ( α llist )

  28. Codatatypes Inductive (or algebraic) datatypes: datatype α list = Nil | Cons α ( α list ) Theorems: Distinctness, injectivity, exhaustiveness, induction Coinductive (or coalgebraic) datatypes: codatatype α llist = LNil | LCons α ( α llist ) codatatype α stream = SCons α ( α stream )

  29. Codatatypes Inductive (or algebraic) datatypes: datatype α list = Nil | Cons α ( α list ) Theorems: Distinctness, injectivity, exhaustiveness, induction Coinductive (or coalgebraic) datatypes: codatatype α llist = LNil | LCons α ( α llist ) codatatype α stream = SCons α ( α stream ) Theorems: Distinctness, injectivity, exhaustiveness, coinduction

  30. Syntax and Semantics datatype fmla = Atm atom | Neg fmla | Conj fmla fmla | All var fmla

  31. Syntax and Semantics datatype fmla = Atm atom | Neg fmla | Conj fmla fmla | All var fmla � x � S = Terms ξ x ξ � � � f ( t 1 , ... , t n ) � S � t 1 � S ξ , ... , � t n � S = F f ξ ξ � � � t 1 � S ξ , ... , � t n � S S | = ξ p ( t 1 , ... , t n ) = Atoms P p ξ

  32. Syntax and Semantics datatype fmla = Atm atom | Neg fmla | Conj fmla fmla | All var fmla � x � S = Terms ξ x ξ � � � f ( t 1 , ... , t n ) � S � t 1 � S ξ , ... , � t n � S = F f ξ ξ � � � t 1 � S ξ , ... , � t n � S S | = ξ p ( t 1 , ... , t n ) = Atoms P p ξ S | = ξ Atm a = S | = ξ a Formulas = ξ Neg ϕ = = ξ ϕ S | S �| S | = ξ Conj ϕ ψ = S | = ξ ϕ ∧ S | = ξ ψ = ξ All x ϕ = = ξ [ x ← a ] ϕ S | ∀ a ∈ S . S |

  33. A Gentzen System Γ ⊢ ∆ , ϕ Γ , ϕ ⊢ ∆ A X N EG L N EG R Γ , Atm a ⊢ ∆ , Atm a Γ , Neg ϕ ⊢ ∆ Γ ⊢ ∆ , Neg ϕ Γ , ϕ , ψ ⊢ ∆ Γ ⊢ ∆ , ϕ Γ ⊢ ∆ , ψ C ONJ L C ONJ R Γ , Conj ϕ ψ ⊢ ∆ Γ ⊢ ∆ , Conj ϕ ψ Γ , All x ϕ , ϕ [ t / x ] ⊢ ∆ Γ ⊢ ∆ , ϕ [ y / x ] A LL R A LL L ( y fresh) Γ , All x ϕ ⊢ ∆ Γ ⊢ ∆ , All x ϕ

  34. Abstracting Away A X p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( z ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , z ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( z ) A X p ( y ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( y ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) , p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) A LL L x , p ( x ) , y A LL L x , p ( x ) , x ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( z ) C ONJ R p ( y ) , p ( z ) ∀ x . p ( x ) ⊢ p ( y ) ∧ p ( z )

  35. Abstracting Away r 6 s 6 r 5 s 5 r 4 r 3 s 3 s 4 r 1 r 2 s 1 s 2 r 0 s 0

  36. Abstracting Away ( s 6 , r 6 ) ( s 5 , r 5 ) ( s 3 , r 3 ) ( s 4 , r 4 ) ( s 1 , r 1 ) ( s 2 , r 2 ) ( s 0 , r 0 )

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Categorically axiomatizing the classical quantifiers Hyperdoctrines for classical logic Richard

Categorically axiomatizing the classical quantifiers Hyperdoctrines for classical logic Richard

Categorically axiomatizing the classical quantifiers Hyperdoctrines for classical logic Richard McKinley University of Bern TACL 2011 1 / 22 The question When should we consider two proofs in the classical sequent calculus identical We

644 views • 41 slides
Propositional Logic: Completeness of Formal Deduction Alice Gao Lecture 10 CS 245 Logic and

Propositional Logic: Completeness of Formal Deduction Alice Gao Lecture 10 CS 245 Logic and

Propositional Logic: Completeness of Formal Deduction Alice Gao Lecture 10 CS 245 Logic and Computation Fall 2019 1 / 37 Learning Goals By the end of this lecture, you should be able to their defjnitions. theorem. CS 245 Logic and

600 views • 37 slides
Completeness via correspondence for extensions of first degree entailment supplied with classical

Completeness via correspondence for extensions of first degree entailment supplied with classical

Completeness via correspondence for extensions of first degree entailment supplied with classical negation Yaroslav Petrukhin 04/05/2017 yaroslav.petrukhin@mail.ru Lomonosov Moscow State University Completeness via correspondence for

355 views • 31 slides
Leon Henkin on Completeness Henkins renowned proofs of PhDs in Logic 2017 completeness The

Leon Henkin on Completeness Henkins renowned proofs of PhDs in Logic 2017 completeness The

Henkin on Completeness Manzano, M Leon Henkin on Completeness Henkins renowned proofs of PhDs in Logic 2017 completeness The Bochum completeness of FOL in Henkins course Manzano, M References USAL May 2017 Henkin on

1.08k views • 104 slides
Non-classical logics Lecture 2: Classical logic, Part 2 5.11.2014 Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans

Non-classical logics Lecture 2: Classical logic, Part 2 5.11.2014 Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans

Non-classical logics Lecture 2: Classical logic, Part 2 5.11.2014 Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans sofronie@uni-koblenz.de Winter Semester 2014/2015 1 Last time Propositional logic (Syntax, Semantics) Problems: Checking unsatisfiability

574 views • 41 slides
Boolean bunched logic: its semantics and completeness James Brotherston Programming Principles,

Boolean bunched logic: its semantics and completeness James Brotherston Programming Principles,

Boolean bunched logic: its semantics and completeness James Brotherston Programming Principles, Logic and Verification Group Dept. of Computer Science University College London, UK J.Brotherston@ucl.ac.uk Logic Summer School, ANU, 8 December

924 views • 76 slides
An Almost Constructive Proof of Classical First-Order Completeness First Bachelor Seminar Talk

An Almost Constructive Proof of Classical First-Order Completeness First Bachelor Seminar Talk

An Almost Constructive Proof of Classical First-Order Completeness First Bachelor Seminar Talk Dominik Wehr Advisors: Dominik Kirst, Yannick Forster Saarland University 14th December 2018 Syntax, Deduction, and Semantics Model Existence

489 views • 19 slides
Introduction to Linear Logic Andres Ojamaa 23.02.2006 Outline Introduction Classical Logic

Introduction to Linear Logic Andres Ojamaa 23.02.2006 Outline Introduction Classical Logic

Introduction to Linear Logic Andres Ojamaa 23.02.2006 Outline Introduction Classical Logic Linear Logic Background Syntax Informal Semantics Common Variants Some Random Applications Synthesis of Web Services Theorem Provers Quantum

432 views • 19 slides
Classical BI (A logic for reasoning about dualising resource) James Brotherston Cristiano

Classical BI (A logic for reasoning about dualising resource) James Brotherston Cristiano

Classical BI (A logic for reasoning about dualising resource) James Brotherston Cristiano Calcagno Imperial College, London Me British Logic Colloquium Nottingham, 4 Sept 2008 The logic of bunched implications (OHearn and Pym

686 views • 14 slides
Classical Sabermetrics vs. Formal Statistical Inference: Towards a Unified Approach to

Classical Sabermetrics vs. Formal Statistical Inference: Towards a Unified Approach to

Classical Sabermetrics vs. Formal Statistical Inference: Towards a Unified Approach to Quantitative Baseball Research Patrick Kilgo, Brian Schmotzer, Hillary Superak, Paul Weiss, Jeff Switchenko, Lisa Elon, Jason Lee, and Lance Waller

632 views • 48 slides
Validity of bilateral classical logic and Verificationist semantics its application Bilateral

Validity of bilateral classical logic and Verificationist semantics its application Bilateral

Validity of bilateral classical logic and its application Yoriyuki Yamagata Validity of bilateral classical logic and Verificationist semantics its application Bilateral classical logic Proof theoretical semantics of BCL Evidences and

585 views • 42 slides
Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (5) 13.11.2018 Viorica

Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (5) 13.11.2018 Viorica

Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (5) 13.11.2018 Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans e-mail: sofronie@uni-koblenz.de 1 Until now Propositional logic First order logic Syntax: (Many sorted) Signature Terms Atomic

569 views • 41 slides
Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (6) 24.11.2016 Viorica

Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (6) 24.11.2016 Viorica

Formal Specification and Verification Classical logic (6) 24.11.2016 Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans e-mail: sofronie@uni-koblenz.de 1 Until now Propositional logic First-order logic Syntax Semantics Algorithmic Problems/Undecidability

468 views • 30 slides
Formalizing Classical Modal Logic in Constructive Logic Christian Doczkal Gert Smolka

Formalizing Classical Modal Logic in Constructive Logic Christian Doczkal Gert Smolka

Formalizing Classical Modal Logic in Constructive Logic Christian Doczkal Gert Smolka Programming Systems Lab, Saarland University Coq-3 Workshop, Nijmegen, August 26, 2011 Christian Doczkal (Saarland University) Classical Modal Logic in

464 views • 32 slides
Classic-like Analytic Tableaux for Non-Classical Logics Joo Marcos UFRN, BR & RUB, DE

Classic-like Analytic Tableaux for Non-Classical Logics Joo Marcos UFRN, BR & RUB, DE

Classic-like Analytic Tableaux for Non-Classical Logics Joo Marcos UFRN, BR & RUB, DE PhDs in Logic IX Bochum 24 May 2017 Tableaux Classical Logic More on finite-valued logics A Non-classical example Through Suszko Reduction

1.37k views • 112 slides
05Predicate Logic CS 5209: Foundation in Logic and AI Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor February

05Predicate Logic CS 5209: Foundation in Logic and AI Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor February

Predicate Logic: Motivation, Syntax, Proof Theory Semantics of Predicate Logic Soundness and Completeness of Predicate Logic Undecidability of Predicate Logic 05Predicate Logic CS 5209: Foundation in Logic and AI Martin Henz and Aquinas

1.36k views • 69 slides
On the Limitations of Provenance for Queries With Difference Yael Amsterdamer Tel Aviv

On the Limitations of Provenance for Queries With Difference Yael Amsterdamer Tel Aviv

On the Limitations of Provenance for Queries With Difference Yael Amsterdamer Tel Aviv University and INRIA Daniel Deutch Ben Gurion University and INRIA Val Tannen University of Pennsylvania TaPP 2011 Starting

496 views • 13 slides
Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8 Time Varying and Perturbed Systems Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8

Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8 Time Varying and Perturbed Systems Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8

Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8 Time Varying and Perturbed Systems Nonlinear Control Lecture # 8 Time Varying and Perturbed Systems Time-varying Systems x = f ( t, x ) f ( t, x ) is piecewise continuous in t and locally Lipschitz in x for all

557 views • 16 slides
Gorenstein transpose and its dual Guoqiang Zhao January 11, 2019 logo Contents Introduction

Gorenstein transpose and its dual Guoqiang Zhao January 11, 2019 logo Contents Introduction

Contents Introduction and motivation Our main results The dual of the Gorenstein transpose References Gorenstein transpose and its dual Guoqiang Zhao January 11, 2019 logo Contents Introduction and motivation Our main results The dual of

899 views • 69 slides
CSE443 Compilers Dr. Carl Alphonce alphonce@buffalo.edu 343 Davis Hall Team formation Please

CSE443 Compilers Dr. Carl Alphonce alphonce@buffalo.edu 343 Davis Hall Team formation Please

CSE443 Compilers Dr. Carl Alphonce alphonce@buffalo.edu 343 Davis Hall Team formation Please sit with your teams starting next week. C vs SML? Lexical Phases of structure a compiler Figure 1.6, page 5 of text languages & grammars

684 views • 27 slides
Formal Specification of Cypher Nadime Francis University of Edinburgh Wednesday, May, 10th 1 /

Formal Specification of Cypher Nadime Francis University of Edinburgh Wednesday, May, 10th 1 /

Semantics Overview Ambiguous and Edge Cases Incomplete and Inconsistent Cases Formal Specification of Cypher Nadime Francis University of Edinburgh Wednesday, May, 10th 1 / 16 Semantics Overview Ambiguous and Edge Cases Incomplete and

523 views • 38 slides
A Language for Probabilistically Oblivious Computation David Darais , Ian Sweet, Chang Liu,

A Language for Probabilistically Oblivious Computation David Darais , Ian Sweet, Chang Liu,

A Language for Probabilistically Oblivious Computation David Darais , Ian Sweet, Chang Liu, Michael Hicks Secure Storage S[42] secret Cloud You s = S[42] Storage S[s] secret Implementation = encrypt the data Read/write indices

787 views • 59 slides
Query Op)miza)on 1 Query op)miza)on Given an SQL query,

Query Op)miza)on 1 Query op)miza)on Given an SQL query,

Query Op)miza)on 1 Query op)miza)on Given an SQL query, the query op)mizer tries to figure out the order of opera)ons that will make the

550 views • 23 slides
Reinforcement Learning George Konidaris gdk@cs.brown.edu Fall 2019 Machine Learning Subfield

Reinforcement Learning George Konidaris gdk@cs.brown.edu Fall 2019 Machine Learning Subfield

Reinforcement Learning George Konidaris gdk@cs.brown.edu Fall 2019 Machine Learning Subfield of AI concerned with learning from data . Broadly, using: Experience To Improve Performance On Some Task (Tom Mitchell, 1997) vs ML

629 views • 35 slides

More recommend