Primitive recursive estimate of strong normalization for predicate calculus

1982 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 2334-2336 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. E. Mints
1965 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaisi Takeuti

Although Peano's arithmetic can be developed in set theories, it can also be developed independently. This is also true for the theory of ordinal numbers. The author formalized the theory of ordinal numbers in logical systems GLC (in [2]) and FLC (in [3]). These logical systems which contain the concept of ‘arbitrary predicates’ or ‘arbitrary functions’ are of higher order than the first order predicate calculus with equality. In this paper we shall develop the theory of ordinal numbers in the first order predicate calculus with equality as an extension of Peano's arithmetic. This theory will prove to be easy to manage and fairly powerful in the following sense: If A is a sentence of the theory of ordinal numbers, then A is a theorem of our system if and only if the natural translation of A in set theory is a theorem of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It will be treated as a natural extension of Peano's arithmetic. The latter consists of axiom schemata of primitive recursive functions and mathematical induction, while the theory of ordinal numbers consists of axiom schemata of primitive recursive functions of ordinal numbers (cf. [5]), of transfinite induction, of replacement and of cardinals. The latter three axiom schemata can be considered as extensions of mathematical induction.In the theory of ordinal numbers thus developed, we shall construct a model of Zermelo-Fraenkel's set theory by following Gödel's construction in [1]. Our intention is as follows: We shall define a relation α ∈ β as a primitive recursive predicate, which corresponds to F′ α ε F′ β in [1]; Gödel defined the constructible model Δ using the primitive notion ε in the universe or, in other words, using the whole set theory.


Author(s):  
Michael Blondin ◽  
Javier Esparza ◽  
Stefan Jaax ◽  
Philipp J. Meyer

AbstractPopulation protocols are a well established model of computation by anonymous, identical finite-state agents. A protocol is well-specified if from every initial configuration, all fair executions of the protocol reach a common consensus. The central verification question for population protocols is the well-specification problem: deciding if a given protocol is well-specified. Esparza et al. have recently shown that this problem is decidable, but with very high complexity: it is at least as hard as the Petri net reachability problem, which is -hard, and for which only algorithms of non-primitive recursive complexity are currently known. In this paper we introduce the class $${ WS}^3$$ WS 3 of well-specified strongly-silent protocols and we prove that it is suitable for automatic verification. More precisely, we show that $${ WS}^3$$ WS 3 has the same computational power as general well-specified protocols, and captures standard protocols from the literature. Moreover, we show that the membership and correctness problems for $${ WS}^3$$ WS 3 reduce to solving boolean combinations of linear constraints over $${\mathbb {N}}$$ N . This allowed us to develop the first software able to automatically prove correctness for all of the infinitely many possible inputs.


1981 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-367
Author(s):  
Wojciech Przyłuski

The paper presents a logic which is an algorithmic extension of the classical predicate calculus and is based on the ideas given by F. Kröger. The programs and the effects of their execution are the formulas of this logic which are considered at any time scale. There are many interesting properties of the logic which are connected with the notion of time scale. These properties are examined in the paper. Moreover the problem of the formulas normalization is presented. Our logic is compared with the algorithmic logic introduced by A. Salwicki. Next, the usefulness of a new logic in the theory of programs is shown.


1980 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-268
Author(s):  
Ewa Orłowska

The central method employed today for theorem-proving is the resolution method introduced by J. A. Robinson in 1965 for the classical predicate calculus. Since then many improvements of the resolution method have been made. On the other hand, treatment of automated theorem-proving techniques for non-classical logics has been started, in connection with applications of these logics in computer science. In this paper a generalization of a notion of the resolution principle is introduced and discussed. A certain class of first order logics is considered and deductive systems of these logics with a resolution principle as an inference rule are investigated. The necessary and sufficient conditions for the so-called resolution completeness of such systems are given. A generalized Herbrand property for a logic is defined and its connections with the resolution-completeness are presented. A class of binary resolution systems is investigated and a kind of a normal form for derivations in such systems is given. On the ground of the methods developed the resolution system for the classical predicate calculus is described and the resolution systems for some non-classical logics are outlined. A method of program synthesis based on the resolution system for the classical predicate calculus is presented. A notion of a resolution-interpretability of a logic L in another logic L ′ is introduced. The method of resolution-interpretability consists in establishing a relation between formulas of the logic L and some sets of formulas of the logic L ′ with the intention of using the resolution system for L ′ to prove theorems of L. It is shown how the method of resolution-interpretability can be used to prove decidability of sets of unsatisfiable formulas of a given logic.


1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 653-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. D. Gladstone

This paper resolves 3 problems left open by R. M. Robinson in [3].We recall that the set of primitive recursive functions is the closure under (i) substitution (or “composition”), and (ii) recursion, of the set P consisting of the zero, successor and projection functions (see any textbook, for instance p. 120 of [2]).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document