|
Bounded Quantifier
In the study of formal theories in mathematical logic, bounded quantifiers (a.k.a. restricted quantifiers) are often included in a formal language in addition to the standard quantifiers "∀" and "∃". Bounded quantifiers differ from "∀" and "∃" in that bounded quantifiers restrict the range of the quantified variable. The study of bounded quantifiers is motivated by the fact that determining whether a sentence with only bounded quantifiers is true is often not as difficult as determining whether an arbitrary sentence is true. Examples Examples of bounded quantifiers in the context of real analysis include: * \forall x > 0 - for all ''x'' where ''x'' is larger than 0 * \exists y 0 \quad \exists y < 0 \quad (x = y^2) - every positive number is the square of a negative number Bounded quantifiers in arithmetic Suppose that ''L'' is the language of |
Mathematical Logic
Mathematical logic is the study of logic, formal logic within mathematics. Major subareas include model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory. Research in mathematical logic commonly addresses the mathematical properties of formal systems of logic such as their expressive or deductive power. However, it can also include uses of logic to characterize correct mathematical reasoning or to establish foundations of mathematics. Since its inception, mathematical logic has both contributed to and been motivated by the study of foundations of mathematics. This study began in the late 19th century with the development of axiomatic frameworks for geometry, arithmetic, and Mathematical analysis, analysis. In the early 20th century it was shaped by David Hilbert's Hilbert's program, program to prove the consistency of foundational theories. Results of Kurt Gödel, Gerhard Gentzen, and others provided partial resolution to the program, and clarified the issues involved in pr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Powerset
In mathematics, the power set (or powerset) of a set is the set of all subsets of , including the empty set and itself. In axiomatic set theory (as developed, for example, in the ZFC axioms), the existence of the power set of any set is postulated by the axiom of power set. The powerset of is variously denoted as , , , \mathbb(S), or . The notation , meaning the set of all functions from S to a given set of two elements (e.g., ), is used because the powerset of can be identified with, equivalent to, or bijective to the set of all the functions from to the given two elements set. Any subset of is called a ''family of sets'' over . Example If is the set , then all the subsets of are * (also denoted \varnothing or \empty, the empty set or the null set) * * * * * * * and hence the power set of is . Properties If is a finite set with the cardinality (i.e., the number of all elements in the set is ), then the number of all the subsets of is . This fact as well ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Quantifier (logic)
In logic, a quantifier is an operator that specifies how many individuals in the domain of discourse satisfy an open formula. For instance, the universal quantifier \forall in the first order formula \forall x P(x) expresses that everything in the domain satisfies the property denoted by P. On the other hand, the existential quantifier \exists in the formula \exists x P(x) expresses that there exists something in the domain which satisfies that property. A formula where a quantifier takes widest scope is called a quantified formula. A quantified formula must contain a bound variable and a subformula specifying a property of the referent of that variable. The mostly commonly used quantifiers are \forall and \exists. These quantifiers are standardly defined as duals; in classical logic, they are interdefinable using negation. They can also be used to define more complex quantifiers, as in the formula \neg \exists x P(x) which expresses that nothing has the property P. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Typed Lambda Calculus
A typed lambda calculus is a typed formalism that uses the lambda-symbol (\lambda) to denote anonymous function abstraction. In this context, types are usually objects of a syntactic nature that are assigned to lambda terms; the exact nature of a type depends on the calculus considered (see kinds below). From a certain point of view, typed lambda calculi can be seen as refinements of the untyped lambda calculus, but from another point of view, they can also be considered the more fundamental theory and ''untyped lambda calculus'' a special case with only one type. Typed lambda calculi are foundational programming languages and are the base of typed functional programming languages such as ML and Haskell and, more indirectly, typed imperative programming languages. Typed lambda calculi play an important role in the design of type systems for programming languages; here, typability usually captures desirable properties of the program (e.g., the program will not cause a memory acces ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
System F
System F (also polymorphic lambda calculus or second-order lambda calculus) is a typed lambda calculus that introduces, to simply typed lambda calculus, a mechanism of universal quantification over types. System F formalizes parametric polymorphism in programming languages, thus forming a theoretical basis for languages such as Haskell and ML. It was discovered independently by logician Jean-Yves Girard (1972) and computer scientist John C. Reynolds Whereas simply typed lambda calculus has variables ranging over terms, and binders for them, System F additionally has variables ranging over ''types'', and binders for them. As an example, the fact that the identity function can have any type of the form ''A'' → ''A'' would be formalized in System F as the judgement :\vdash \Lambda\alpha. \lambda x^\alpha.x: \forall\alpha.\alpha \to \alpha where \alpha is a type variable. The upper-case \Lambda is traditionally used to denote type-level functions, as opposed to the lower-case \la ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Type Theory
In mathematics, logic, and computer science, a type theory is the formal presentation of a specific type system, and in general type theory is the academic study of type systems. Some type theories serve as alternatives to set theory as a foundation of mathematics. Two influential type theories that were proposed as foundations are Alonzo Church's typed λ-calculus and Per Martin-Löf's intuitionistic type theory. Most computerized proof-writing systems use a type theory for their foundation. A common one is Thierry Coquand's Calculus of Inductive Constructions. History Type theory was created to avoid a paradox in a mathematical foundation based on naive set theory and formal logic. Russell's paradox, which was discovered by Bertrand Russell, existed because a set could be defined using "all possible sets", which included itself. Between 1902 and 1908, Bertrand Russell proposed various "theories of type" to fix the problem. By 1908 Russell arrived at a "ramified" theory ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Subtyping
In programming language theory, subtyping (also subtype polymorphism or inclusion polymorphism) is a form of type polymorphism in which a subtype is a datatype that is related to another datatype (the supertype) by some notion of substitutability, meaning that program elements, typically subroutines or functions, written to operate on elements of the supertype can also operate on elements of the subtype. If S is a subtype of T, the subtyping relation (written as , , or ) means that any term of type S can ''safely be used'' in ''any context'' where a term of type T is expected. The precise semantics of subtyping here crucially depends on the particulars of how ''"safely be used"'' and ''"any context"'' are defined by a given type formalism or programming language. The type system of a programming language essentially defines its own subtyping relation, which may well be trivial, should the language support no (or very little) conversion mechanisms. Due to the su ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Impredicativity
In mathematics, logic and philosophy of mathematics, something that is impredicative is a self-referencing definition. Roughly speaking, a definition is impredicative if it invokes (mentions or quantifies over) the set being defined, or (more commonly) another set that contains the thing being defined. There is no generally accepted precise definition of what it means to be predicative or impredicative. Authors have given different but related definitions. The opposite of impredicativity is predicativity, which essentially entails building stratified (or ramified) theories where quantification over lower levels results in variables of some new type, distinguished from the lower types that the variable ranges over. A prototypical example is intuitionistic type theory, which retains ramification so as to discard impredicativity. Russell's paradox is a famous example of an impredicative construction—namely the set of all sets that do not contain themselves. The paradox is that su ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Schema Of Predicative Separation
In axiomatic set theory, the axiom schema of predicative separation, or of restricted, or Δ0 separation, is a schema of axioms which is a restriction of the usual axiom schema of separation in Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. This name Δ0 stems from the Lévy hierarchy, in analogy with the arithmetic hierarchy. Statement The axiom asserts only the existence of a subset of a set if that subset can be defined without reference to the entire universe of sets. The formal statement of this is the same as full separation schema, but with a restriction on the formulas that may be used: For any formula φ, :\forall x \; \exists y \; \forall z \; (z \in y \leftrightarrow z \in x \wedge \phi(z)) provided that φ contains only bounded quantifiers and, as usual, that the variable ''y'' is not free in it. So all quantifiers in φ, if any, must appear in the forms : \exists u \in v \; \psi(u) : \forall u \in v \; \psi(u) for some sub-formula ψ and, of course, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Constructive Set Theory
Constructive set theory is an approach to mathematical constructivism following the program of axiomatic set theory. The same first-order language with "=" and "\in" of classical set theory is usually used, so this is not to be confused with a constructive types approach. On the other hand, some constructive theories are indeed motivated by their interpretability in type theories. In addition to rejecting the principle of excluded middle (), constructive set theories often require some logical quantifiers in their axioms to be bounded, motivated by results tied to impredicativity. Introduction Constructive outlook Use of intuitionistic logic The logic of the set theories discussed here is constructive in that it rejects , i.e. that the disjunction \phi \lor \neg \phi automatically holds for all propositions. As a rule, to prove the excluded middle for a proposition P, i.e. to prove the particular disjunction P \lor \neg P, either P or \neg P needs to be explicitly prov ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Kripke–Platek Set Theory
The Kripke–Platek set theory (KP), pronounced , is an axiomatic set theory developed by Saul Kripke and Richard Platek. The theory can be thought of as roughly the predicative part of ZFC and is considerably weaker than it. Axioms In its formulation, a Δ0 formula is one all of whose quantifiers are bounded. This means any quantification is the form \forall u \in v or \exist u \in v. (See the Lévy hierarchy.) * Axiom of extensionality: Two sets are the same if and only if they have the same elements. * Axiom of induction: φ(''a'') being a formula, if for all sets ''x'' the assumption that φ(''y'') holds for all elements ''y'' of ''x'' entails that φ(''x'') holds, then φ(''x'') holds for all sets ''x''. * Axiom of empty set: There exists a set with no members, called the empty set and denoted . * Axiom of pairing: If ''x'', ''y'' are sets, then so is , a set containing ''x'' and ''y'' as its only elements. * Axiom of union: For any set ''x'', there is a set ''y'' such ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
