Graduate → Mathematical Logic and Foundations → Predicate Logic ↓
Formal Systems in Predicate Logic
Formal systems in predicate logic are fundamental in mathematical logic and serve as the backbone for understanding logical inference and reasoning. The purpose of this explanation is to clarify the complex workings of formal systems, particularly in the area of predicate logic, by breaking down complex ideas into more digestible parts and presenting them in a simple and structured manner. We will cover terminology, examples, and visual representations to ensure a complete understanding of how formal systems work.
Introduction to predicate logic
Predicate logic, also known as first-order logic, extends the capability of propositional logic by introducing predicates, quantifiers, and variables. While propositional logic deals with simple statements that are either true or false, predicate logic allows us to express more complex statements involving objects and their relations.
Elements of predicate logic include:
- Predicates: Functions that return true or false, often used to express properties of objects.
- Quantifiers: symbols such as
∀
(for all) and∃
(there exists) that express the scope of the variables involved. - Variables: Symbols representing objects in the dialog box.
- Logical connectives: such as
∧
(and),∨
(or),¬
(not),→
(sign), etc.
Components of a formal system
A formal system in predicate logic includes the following elements:
- Alphabet: A set of symbols used to form expressions.
- Syntax: rules for creating well-formed formulas (WFFs) with the symbols of the alphabet.
- Semantics: Interpretations that give meaning to formulas.
- Axiom: A set of elementary statements that are assumed to be true.
- Inference rules: Logical principles used to deduce new statements from existing statements.
Alphabet in predicate logic
The alphabet of predicate logic includes the following:
P, Q, R, ...
: predicate symbolsx, y, z, ...
: variable symbols∀, ∃
: quantifier∧, ∨, ¬, →
: logical connectives∈, =
: relational symbols- Brackets for grouping:
(
,)
Syntax of predicate logic
Syntax rules help determine which combinations of symbols are considered well-formed formulas (WFF). Here are some basic rules:
- A predicate with terms, e.g.,
P(x)
, is a WFF. - If
φ
andψ
are WFFs, then(φ ∧ ψ)
,(φ ∨ ψ)
,(φ → ψ)
, and¬φ
are also WFFs. - If
φ
is a WFF andx
is a variable, then∀x φ
and∃x φ
are WFFs.
Semantic interpretation
Semantics in predicate logic involves assigning meanings to formulas. To do this, we need to interpret the symbols in the language:
- Field of interaction: A set of objects that the predicate and variable refer to.
- Explanation: It gives meaning to predicate symbols, variable symbols and constants in logic.
The interpretation of a formula I
can be expressed as follows:
I: P(x) -> True if and only if the object corresponding to x has the property P.
Axioms and inference rules
Axioms are statements that are considered true within a formal system. They form the foundational truths upon which other true statements are built. For example, in arithmetic, statements such as 0 + x = x
can be considered axioms.
Inference rules are used to infer new truths from axioms or previously inferred truths. Rules such as modus ponens are examples of this:
Modus ponens: If (φ → ψ) is true, and φ is true, then ψ will also be true.
Example of a formal system
Consider a simple formal system where our objective is to explore properties of numbers and operations:
- Alphabet:
P(x), Q(y), +, 0, =, ∀, ∃, ∧, ¬
- Self-evident:
∀x (0 + x = x)
∀x ∀y (x + y = y + x)
- Inference rule: modus ponens
The axioms above tell us the basic properties of addition. Using these and some inference rules, we can determine new facts, for example, that x + 0 = x
, as well as properties such as commutativity.
Example 1: Checking well-formed formulas
Given the following strings, determine which of the formulas are well-formed:
∀x (P(x) → ∃y Q(y))
x Q(x → y) ∧ P
Analysis:
∀x (P(x) → ∃y Q(y))
: This is a well-formula, because it applies quantifiers and logical implications correctly.x Q(x → y) ∧ P
: This is not a well-formed formula because of incorrect logical structure and lack of connective context.
Example 2: Simple semantic assignment
Suppose we have a formula ∀x (P(x) → Q(x))
to analyze within a specific domain:
Let the domain be the set of natural numbers, and specify:
P(x): x is even
Q(x): x is divisible by 2
The interpretation indicates that all even numbers are divisible by 2, which is a universally true statement in this context.
Conclusion
Understanding formal systems in predicate logic is crucial to delving deeper into advanced mathematical logic. By mastering the elements of formal systems - alphabet, syntax, semantics, axioms, and inference rules - one can analyze complex logical structures and effectively formalize statements about abstract concepts. Through practical examples and visual aids, the nuances of predicate logic become more clear, leading to a deeper understanding of its application in various mathematical and logical scenarios.