|
Importation (logic)
Exportation is a valid rule of replacement in propositional logic. The rule allows conditional statements having conjunctive antecedents to be replaced by statements having conditional consequents and vice versa in logical proofs. It is the rule that: ((P \land Q) \to R) \Leftrightarrow (P \to (Q \to R)) Where "\Leftrightarrow" is a metalogical symbol representing "can be replaced in a proof with." In strict terminology, ((P \land Q) \to R) \Rightarrow (P \to (Q \to R)) is the law of exportation, for it "exports" a proposition from the antecedent of (P \land Q) \to R to its consequent. Its converse, the law of importation, (P \to (Q \to R))\Rightarrow ((P \land Q) \to R) , "imports" a proposition from the consequent of P \to (Q \to R) to its antecedent. Formal notation The ''exportation'' rule may be written in sequent notation: :((P \land Q) \to R) \dashv\vdash (P \to (Q \to R)) where \dashv\vdash is a metalogical symbol meaning that (P \to (Q \to R)) is a syntactic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Rule Of Replacement
In logic, a rule of replacementMoore and Parker is a transformation rule that may be applied to only a particular segment of an logical expression, expression. A logical system may be constructed so that it uses either axioms, rules of inference, or both as transformation rules for Well-formed formula, logical expressions in the system. Whereas a rule of inference is always applied to a whole logical expression, a rule of replacement may be applied to only a particular segment. Within the context of a logical proof, logically equivalent expressions may replace each other. Rules of replacement are used in propositional logic to manipulate propositions. Common rules of replacement include de Morgan's laws, Commutative property, commutation, Associative property, association, Distribution (logic), distribution, double negation, Transposition (logic), transposition, Material implication (rule of inference), material implication, logical equivalence, Exportation (logic), exportation, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inference Rule
In the philosophy of logic, a rule of inference, inference rule or transformation rule is a logical form consisting of a function which takes premises, analyzes their syntax, and returns a conclusion (or conclusions). For example, the rule of inference called ''modus ponens'' takes two premises, one in the form "If p then q" and another in the form "p", and returns the conclusion "q". The rule is valid with respect to the semantics of classical logic (as well as the semantics of many other non-classical logics), in the sense that if the premises are true (under an interpretation), then so is the conclusion. Typically, a rule of inference preserves truth, a semantic property. In many-valued logic, it preserves a general designation. But a rule of inference's action is purely syntactic, and does not need to preserve any semantic property: any function from sets of formulae to formulae counts as a rule of inference. Usually only rules that are recursive are important; i.e. rule ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Curry–Howard Correspondence
In programming language theory and proof theory, the Curry–Howard correspondence (also known as the Curry–Howard isomorphism or equivalence, or the proofs-as-programs and propositions- or formulae-as-types interpretation) is the direct relationship between computer programs and mathematical proofs. It is a generalization of a syntactic analogy between systems of formal logic and computational calculi that was first discovered by the American mathematician Haskell Curry and the logician William Alvin Howard. It is the link between logic and computation that is usually attributed to Curry and Howard, although the idea is related to the operational interpretation of intuitionistic logic given in various formulations by L. E. J. Brouwer, Arend Heyting and Andrey Kolmogorov (see Brouwer–Heyting–Kolmogorov interpretation) and Stephen Kleene (see Realizability). The relationship has been extended to include category theory as the three-way Curry–Howard–Lambek corr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Currying
In mathematics and computer science, currying is the technique of translating the evaluation of a function that takes multiple arguments into evaluating a sequence of functions, each with a single argument. For example, currying a function f that takes three arguments creates a nested unary function g, so that the code :\textx=f(a,b,c) gives x the same value as the code : \begin \texth = g(a) \\ \texti = h(b) \\ \textx = i(c), \end or called in sequence, :\textx = g(a)(b)(c). In a more mathematical language, a function that takes two arguments, one from X and one from Y, and produces outputs in Z, by currying is translated into a function that takes a single argument from X and produces as outputs ''functions'' from Y to Z. This is a natural one-to-one correspondence between these two types of functions, so that the sets together with functions between them form a Cartesian closed category. The currying of a function with more than two arguments can then be defined by induction. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
De Morgan's Law
In propositional logic and Boolean algebra, De Morgan's laws, also known as De Morgan's theorem, are a pair of transformation rules that are both valid rules of inference. They are named after Augustus De Morgan, a 19th-century British mathematician. The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and disjunctions purely in terms of each other via negation. The rules can be expressed in English as: * The negation of a disjunction is the conjunction of the negations * The negation of a conjunction is the disjunction of the negations or * The complement of the union of two sets is the same as the intersection of their complements * The complement of the intersection of two sets is the same as the union of their complements or * not (A or B) = (not A) and (not B) * not (A and B) = (not A) or (not B) where "A or B" is an " inclusive or" meaning ''at least'' one of A or B rather than an "exclusive or" that means ''exactly'' one of A or B. In set theory and Boolean algebra, these ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Associativity
In mathematics, the associative property is a property of some binary operations, which means that rearranging the parentheses in an expression will not change the result. In propositional logic, associativity is a valid rule of replacement for expressions in logical proofs. Within an expression containing two or more occurrences in a row of the same associative operator, the order in which the operations are performed does not matter as long as the sequence of the operands is not changed. That is (after rewriting the expression with parentheses and in infix notation if necessary), rearranging the parentheses in such an expression will not change its value. Consider the following equations: \begin (2 + 3) + 4 &= 2 + (3 + 4) = 9 \,\\ 2 \times (3 \times 4) &= (2 \times 3) \times 4 = 24 . \end Even though the parentheses were rearranged on each line, the values of the expressions were not altered. Since this holds true when performing addition and multiplication on any rea ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Associative Property
In mathematics, the associative property is a property of some binary operations, which means that rearranging the parentheses in an expression will not change the result. In propositional logic, associativity is a valid rule of replacement for expressions in logical proofs. Within an expression containing two or more occurrences in a row of the same associative operator, the order in which the operations are performed does not matter as long as the sequence of the operands is not changed. That is (after rewriting the expression with parentheses and in infix notation if necessary), rearranging the parentheses in such an expression will not change its value. Consider the following equations: \begin (2 + 3) + 4 &= 2 + (3 + 4) = 9 \,\\ 2 \times (3 \times 4) &= (2 \times 3) \times 4 = 24 . \end Even though the parentheses were rearranged on each line, the values of the expressions were not altered. Since this holds true when performing addition and multiplication on any ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
De Morgan's Laws
In propositional logic and Boolean algebra, De Morgan's laws, also known as De Morgan's theorem, are a pair of transformation rules that are both valid rules of inference. They are named after Augustus De Morgan, a 19th-century British mathematician. The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and disjunctions purely in terms of each other via negation. The rules can be expressed in English as: * The negation of a disjunction is the conjunction of the negations * The negation of a conjunction is the disjunction of the negations or * The complement of the union of two sets is the same as the intersection of their complements * The complement of the intersection of two sets is the same as the union of their complements or * not (A or B) = (not A) and (not B) * not (A and B) = (not A) or (not B) where "A or B" is an " inclusive or" meaning ''at least'' one of A or B rather than an " exclusive or" that means ''exactly'' one of A or B. In set theory and Boolean algebra, th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Double Negation
In propositional logic, double negation is the theorem that states that "If a statement is true, then it is not the case that the statement is not true." This is expressed by saying that a proposition ''A'' is logically equivalent to ''not (not-A''), or by the formula A ≡ ~(~A) where the sign ≡ expresses logical equivalence and the sign ~ expresses negation. Like the law of the excluded middle, this principle is considered to be a law of thought in classical logic, but it is disallowed by intuitionistic logic. The principle was stated as a theorem of propositional logic by Russell and Whitehead in ''Principia Mathematica'' as: :: \mathbf. \ \ \vdash.\ p \ \equiv \ \thicksim(\thicksim p)PM 1952 reprint of 2nd edition 1927 pp. 101–02, 117. ::"This is the principle of double negation, ''i.e.'' a proposition is equivalent of the falsehood of its negation." Elimination and introduction Double negation elimination and double negation introduction are two valid rules ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Material Implication (rule Of Inference)
In propositional logic, material implication is a valid rule of replacement that allows for a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that ''P implies Q'' is logically equivalent to ''not-P or Q'' and that either form can replace the other in logical proofs. In other words, if P is true, then Q must also be true, while if Q is true, then P cannot be true either; additionally, when P is not true, Q may be either true or false. P \to Q \Leftrightarrow \neg P \lor Q Where "\Leftrightarrow" is a metalogical symbol representing "can be replaced in a proof with," and P and Q are any given logical statements. To illustrate this, consider the following statements: * P: Sam ate an orange for lunch * Q: Sam ate a fruit for lunch Then, to say, "Sam ate an orange for lunch" "Sam ate a fruit for lunch" (P \to Q). Logically, if Sam did not eat a fruit for lunch, then Sam also cannot have eaten an orange for lunch (b ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Logical System
A formal system is an abstract structure used for inferring theorems from axioms according to a set of rules. These rules, which are used for carrying out the inference of theorems from axioms, are the logical calculus of the formal system. A formal system is essentially an "axiomatic system". In 1921, David Hilbert proposed to use such a system as the foundation for the knowledge in mathematics. A formal system may represent a well-defined system of abstract thought. The term ''formalism'' is sometimes a rough synonym for ''formal system'', but it also refers to a given style of notation, for example, Paul Dirac's bra–ket notation. Background Each formal system is described by primitive symbols (which collectively form an alphabet) to finitely construct a formal language from a set of axioms through inferential rules of formation. The system thus consists of valid formulas built up through finite combinations of the primitive symbols—combinations that are formed fro ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Theorem
In mathematics, a theorem is a statement that has been proved, or can be proved. The ''proof'' of a theorem is a logical argument that uses the inference rules of a deductive system to establish that the theorem is a logical consequence of the axioms and previously proved theorems. In the mainstream of mathematics, the axioms and the inference rules are commonly left implicit, and, in this case, they are almost always those of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice, or of a less powerful theory, such as Peano arithmetic. A notable exception is Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, which involves the Grothendieck universes whose existence requires the addition of a new axiom to the set theory. Generally, an assertion that is explicitly called a theorem is a proved result that is not an immediate consequence of other known theorems. Moreover, many authors qualify as ''theorems'' only the most important results, and use the terms ''lemma'', ''proposition'' ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.PNG "Click for more on -> Theorem")