Proof theory in the context of Recursive data type


Proof theory in the context of Recursive data type

Proof theory Study page number 1 of 3

Play TriviaQuestions Online!

or

Skip to study material about Proof theory in the context of "Recursive data type"


⭐ Core Definition: Proof theory

Proof theory is a major branch of mathematical logic and theoretical computer science within which proofs are treated as formal mathematical objects, facilitating their analysis by mathematical techniques. Proofs are typically presented as inductively defined data structures such as lists, boxed lists, or trees, which are constructed according to the axioms and rules of inference of a given logical system. Consequently, proof theory is syntactic in nature, in contrast to model theory, which is semantic in nature.

Some of the major areas of proof theory include structural proof theory, ordinal analysis, provability logic, proof-theoretic semantics, reverse mathematics, proof mining, automated theorem proving, and proof complexity. Much research also focuses on applications in computer science, linguistics, and philosophy.

↓ Menu
HINT:

In this Dossier

Proof theory in the context of Mathematical proof

A mathematical proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement, showing that the stated assumptions logically guarantee the conclusion. The argument may use other previously established statements, such as theorems; but every proof can, in principle, be constructed using only certain basic or original assumptions known as axioms, along with the accepted rules of inference. Proofs are examples of exhaustive deductive reasoning that establish logical certainty, to be distinguished from empirical arguments or non-exhaustive inductive reasoning that establish "reasonable expectation". Presenting many cases in which the statement holds is not enough for a proof, which must demonstrate that the statement is true in all possible cases. A proposition that has not been proved but is believed to be true is known as a conjecture, or a hypothesis if frequently used as an assumption for further mathematical work.

Proofs employ logic expressed in mathematical symbols, along with natural language that usually admits some ambiguity. In most mathematical literature, proofs are written in terms of rigorous informal logic. Purely formal proofs, written fully in symbolic language without the involvement of natural language, are considered in proof theory. The distinction between formal and informal proofs has led to much examination of current and historical mathematical practice, quasi-empiricism in mathematics, and so-called folk mathematics, oral traditions in the mainstream mathematical community or in other cultures. The philosophy of mathematics is concerned with the role of language and logic in proofs, and mathematics as a language.

View the full Wikipedia page for Mathematical proof
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Mathematical object

A mathematical object is an abstract concept arising in mathematics. Typically, a mathematical object can be a value that can be assigned to a symbol, and therefore can be involved in formulas. Commonly encountered mathematical objects include numbers, expressions, shapes, functions, and sets. Mathematical objects can be very complex; for example, theorems, proofs, and even formal theories are considered as mathematical objects in proof theory.

In philosophy of mathematics, the concept of "mathematical objects" touches on topics of existence, identity, and the nature of reality. In metaphysics, objects are often considered entities that possess properties and can stand in various relations to one another. Philosophers debate whether mathematical objects have an independent existence outside of human thought (realism), or if their existence is dependent on mental constructs or language (idealism and nominalism). Objects can range from the concrete: such as physical objects usually studied in applied mathematics, to the abstract, studied in pure mathematics. What constitutes an "object" is foundational to many areas of philosophy, from ontology (the study of being) to epistemology (the study of knowledge). In mathematics, objects are often seen as entities that exist independently of the physical world, raising questions about their ontological status. There are varying schools of thought which offer different perspectives on the matter, and many famous mathematicians and philosophers each have differing opinions on which is more correct.

View the full Wikipedia page for Mathematical object
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Mathematical logic

Mathematical logic is the study of formal logic within mathematics. Major subareas include model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory (also known as computability 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 analysis. In the early 20th century it was shaped by David Hilbert's 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 proving consistency. Work in set theory showed that almost all ordinary mathematics can be formalized in terms of sets, although there are some theorems that cannot be proven in common axiom systems for set theory. Contemporary work in the foundations of mathematics often focuses on establishing which parts of mathematics can be formalized in particular formal systems (as in reverse mathematics) rather than trying to find theories in which all of mathematics can be developed.

View the full Wikipedia page for Mathematical logic
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Model theory

In mathematical logic, model theory is the study of the relationship between formal theories (a collection of sentences in a formal language expressing statements about a mathematical structure), and their models (those structures in which the statements of the theory hold). The aspects investigated include the number and size of models of a theory, the relationship of different models to each other, and their interaction with the formal language itself. In particular, model theorists also investigate the sets that can be defined in a model of a theory, and the relationship of such definable sets to each other.As a separate discipline, model theory goes back to Alfred Tarski, who first used the term "Theory of Models" in publication in 1954.Since the 1970s, the subject has been shaped decisively by Saharon Shelah's stability theory.

Compared to other areas of mathematical logic such as proof theory, model theory is often less concerned with formal rigour and closer in spirit to classical mathematics.This has prompted the comment that "if proof theory is about the sacred, then model theory is about the profane".The applications of model theory to algebraic and Diophantine geometry reflect this proximity to classical mathematics, as they often involve an integration of algebraic and model-theoretic results and techniques. Consequently, proof theory is syntactic in nature, in contrast to model theory, which is semantic in nature.

View the full Wikipedia page for Model theory
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Logical disjunction

In logic, disjunction (also known as logical disjunction, logical or, logical addition, or inclusive disjunction) is a logical connective typically notated as and read aloud as "or". For instance, the English language sentence "it is sunny or it is warm" can be represented in logic using the disjunctive formula , assuming that abbreviates "it is sunny" and abbreviates "it is warm".

In classical logic, disjunction is given a truth functional semantics according to which a formula is true unless both and are false. Because this semantics allows a disjunctive formula to be true when both of its disjuncts are true, it is an inclusive interpretation of disjunction, in contrast with exclusive disjunction. Classical proof theoretical treatments are often given in terms of rules such as disjunction introduction and disjunction elimination. Disjunction has also been given numerous non-classical treatments, motivated by problems including Aristotle's sea battle argument, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, as well as the numerous mismatches between classical disjunction and its nearest equivalents in natural languages.

View the full Wikipedia page for Logical disjunction
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of David Hilbert

David Hilbert (/ˈhɪlbərt/; German: [ˈdaːvɪt ˈhɪlbɐt]; 23 January 1862 – 14 February 1943) was a German mathematician and philosopher of mathematics and one of the most influential mathematicians of his time.

Hilbert discovered and developed a broad range of fundamental ideas including invariant theory, the calculus of variations, commutative algebra, algebraic number theory, the foundations of geometry, spectral theory of operators and its application to integral equations, mathematical physics, and the foundations of mathematics (particularly proof theory). He adopted and defended Georg Cantor's set theory and transfinite numbers. In 1900, he presented a collection of problems that set a course for mathematical research of the 20th century.

View the full Wikipedia page for David Hilbert
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Recursion theory

Computability theory, also known as recursion theory, is a branch of mathematical logic, computer science, and the theory of computation that originated in the 1930s with the study of computable functions and Turing degrees. The field has since expanded to include the study of generalized computability and definability. In these areas, computability theory overlaps with proof theory and effective descriptive set theory.

Basic questions addressed by computability theory include:

View the full Wikipedia page for Recursion theory
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Gerhard Gentzen

Gerhard Karl Erich Gentzen (24 November 1909 – 4 August 1945) was a German mathematician and logician. He made major contributions to the foundations of mathematics, proof theory, especially on natural deduction and sequent calculus. He died of starvation in a Czech prison camp in Prague in 1945.

View the full Wikipedia page for Gerhard Gentzen
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Natural deduction

In logic and proof theory, natural deduction is a kind of proof calculus in which logical reasoning is expressed by inference rules closely related to the "natural" way of reasoning. This contrasts with Hilbert-style systems, which instead use axioms as much as possible to express the logical laws of deductive reasoning.

View the full Wikipedia page for Natural deduction
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Structural proof theory

In mathematical logic, structural proof theory is the subdiscipline of proof theory that studies proof calculi that support a notion of analytic proof, a kind of proof whose semantic properties are exposed. When all the theorems of a logic formalised in a proof calculus have analytic proofs, then the proof calculus can be used to demonstrate such things as consistency, provide decision procedures, and allow mathematical or computational witnesses to be extracted as counterparts to theorems, the kind of task that is more often given to model theory.

View the full Wikipedia page for Structural proof theory
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Ordinal analysis

In proof theory, ordinal analysis assigns ordinals (often large countable ordinals) to mathematical theories as a measure of their strength. If theories have the same proof-theoretic ordinal they are often equiconsistent, and if one theory has a larger proof-theoretic ordinal than another it can often prove the consistency of the second theory.

In addition to obtaining the proof-theoretic ordinal of a theory, in practice ordinal analysis usually also yields various other pieces of information about the theory being analyzed, for example characterizations of the classes of provably recursive, hyperarithmetical, or functions of the theory.

View the full Wikipedia page for Ordinal analysis
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Provability logic

Provability logic is a branch of proof theory and a modal logic, in which the box (or "necessity") operator is interpreted as 'it is provable that'. The point is to capture the notion of a proof predicate of a reasonably rich formal theory, such as Peano arithmetic.

View the full Wikipedia page for Provability logic
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Proof-theoretic semantics

Proof-theoretic semantics is a branch of proof theory and an approach to the semantics of logic that attempts to locate the meaning of propositions and logical connectives not in terms of interpretations, as in Tarskian approaches to semantics, but in the role that the proposition or logical connective plays within a system of inference.

View the full Wikipedia page for Proof-theoretic semantics
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Proof mining

In proof theory, a branch of mathematical logic, proof mining (or proof unwinding) is a research program that studies or analyzes formalized proofs, especially in analysis, to obtain explicit bounds, ranges or rates of convergence from proofs that, when expressed in natural language, appear to be nonconstructive.This research has led to improved results in analysis obtained from the analysis of classical proofs.

View the full Wikipedia page for Proof mining
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Proof complexity

In logic and theoretical computer science, and specifically proof theory and computational complexity theory, proof complexity is the field aiming to understand and analyse the computational resources that are required to prove or refute statements. Research in proof complexity is predominantly concerned with proving proof-length lower and upper bounds in various propositional proof systems. For example, among the major challenges of proof complexity is showing that the Frege system, the usual propositional calculus, does not admit polynomial-size proofs of all tautologies. Here the size of the proof is simply the number of symbols in it, and a proof is said to be of polynomial size if it is polynomial in the size of the tautology it proves.

Systematic study of proof complexity began with the work of Stephen Cook and Robert Reckhow (1979) who provided the basic definition of a propositional proof system from the perspective of computational complexity. Specifically Cook and Reckhow observed that proving proof size lower bounds on stronger and stronger propositional proof systems can be viewed as a step towards separating NP from coNP (and thus P from NP), since the existence of a propositional proof system that admits polynomial size proofs for all tautologies is equivalent to NP=coNP.

View the full Wikipedia page for Proof complexity
↑ Return to Menu

Proof theory in the context of Conservative extension

In mathematical logic, a conservative extension is a supertheory of a theory which is often convenient for proving theorems, but proves no new theorems about the language of the original theory. Similarly, a non-conservative extension, or proper extension, is a supertheory which is not conservative, and can prove more theorems than the original.

More formally stated, a theory is a (proof theoretic) conservative extension of a theory if every theorem of is a theorem of , and any theorem of in the language of is already a theorem of .

View the full Wikipedia page for Conservative extension
↑ Return to Menu