|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| '''Independence-friendly logic''' ('''IF logic'''), proposed by [[Jaakko Hintikka]] and [[Gabriel Sandu (philosopher)|Gabriel Sandu]] in 1989, aims at being a more natural and intuitive alternative to classical [[first-order logic]] (FOL). IF logic is characterized by [[branching quantifier]]s. It is more expressive than FOL because it allows one to express independence relations between quantified variables.
| | I would like to introduce myself to you, I am Andrew and my spouse doesn't like it at all. For many years he's been living in Mississippi and he doesn't strategy on altering it. What me and my family love is doing ballet but I've been using on new things recently. Office supervising is exactly where my main income comes from but I've always needed my personal company.<br><br>Also visit my weblog ... best psychic readings ([http://www.radyotsm.com/profile.php?u=MaGraham relevant website www.radyotsm.com]) |
| | |
| For example, the formula ∀a ∀b ∃c/b ∃d/a φ(a,b,c,d) ("x/y" should be read as "x independent of y") cannot be expressed in FOL. This is because c depends ''only'' on a and d depends ''only'' on b. First-order logic cannot express these independences by any linear reordering of the quantifiers. In part, IF logic was motivated by [[game semantics]] for games with [[imperfect information]].
| |
| | |
| IF logic is translation equivalent with [[existential second-order logic]] (<math>\Sigma^1_1</math>) and also with Väänänen's [[dependence logic]] and with first-order logic extended with [[Henkin quantifier]]s. Although it shares a number of metalogical properties with first-order logic, there are some differences, including lack of closure under negation and higher complexity for deciding the validity of formulas. Extended IF logic addresses the closure problem, but it sacrifices game semantics in the process, and it properly belongs to higher fragment of second-order logic ( <math>\Delta_2^1</math>).
| |
| | |
| Hintikka's proposal that IF logic and its extended version be used as [[foundations of mathematics]] has been met with skepticism by other mathematicians, including Väänänen and [[Solomon Feferman]].
| |
| | |
| == Semantics ==
| |
| Since [[Tarskian semantics]] does not allow indeterminate [[truth value]]s, it cannot be used for IF logic. Hintikka further argues that the standard [[Tarskian semantics|semantics of FOL]] cannot accommodate IF logic because the [[principle of compositionality]] fails in the latter. [[Wilfrid Hodges]] (1997) gives a compositional semantics for it in part by having the truth clauses for IF formulas quantify over sets of assignments rather than just assignments (as the usual truth clauses do).
| |
| | |
| The [[Game semantics|game-theoretic]] semantics for FOL treats a FOL formula as a game of [[perfect information]], whose players are Verifier and Falsifier. The same holds for the standard semantics of IF logic, except that the games are of [[imperfect information]].
| |
| | |
| Independence relations between the quantified variables are modelled in the game tree as indistinguishability relations between game states with respect to a certain player. In other words, the players are not certain where they are in the tree (this ignorance simulates simultaneous play). The formula is evaluated as true if there Verifier has a winning strategy, false if Falsifier has a winning strategy, and indeterminate otherwise.
| |
| | |
| A winning strategy is informally defined as a strategy that is guaranteed to win the game, regardless of how the other players play. It can be given a completely rigorous, formal definition.
| |
| | |
| == Extended IF logic ==
| |
| {{expand section|date=October 2012}}
| |
| IF logic is not closed under classical negation. The boolean closure of IF logic is known as '''extended IF logic''' and it is equivalent to a proper fragment of <math>\Delta_2^1</math> (Figueira et al. 2011). Hintikka (1996, p. 196) claimed that "virtually all of classical mathematics can in principle be done in extended IF first-order logic".
| |
| | |
| == Properties and critique ==
| |
| A number of properties of IF logic follow from logical equivalence with <math>\Sigma^1_1</math> and bring it closer to [[first-order logic]] including a [[compactness theorem]], a [[Löwenheim–Skolem theorem]], and a [[Craig interpolation]] theorem. (Väänänen, 2007, p. 86). However, Väänänen (2001) proved that the set of [[Gödel number]]s of valid sentences of IF logic with at least one binary
| |
| predicate symbol (set denoted by ''Val<sub>IF</sub>'') is [[recursively]] [[isomorphic]] with the corresponding set of Gödel numbers of valid (full) second-order sentences in a vocabulary that contains one binary predicate symbol (set denoted by ''Val<sup>2</sup>''). Furthermore Väänänen showed that ''Val<sup>2</sup>'' is the complete [[Levy hierarchy|Π<sub>2</sub>-definable]] set of integers, and that it is ''Val<sup>2</sup>'' not in <math>\Sigma^m_n</math> for any finite ''m'' and ''n''. Väänänen (2007, pp. 136-139) summarizes the complexity results as follows:
| |
| | |
| {| class="wikitable"
| |
| |-
| |
| ! Problem !! first-order logic !! IF/depence/ESO logic
| |
| |-
| |
| | [[Decidability (logic)|Decision]]|| <math>\Sigma_1^0</math> ([[recursively enumerable|r.e.]]) || <math>\Pi_2</math>
| |
| |-
| |
| | Non-[[validity]]|| <math>\Pi_1^0</math> ([[co-r.e.]]) || <math>\Sigma_2</math>
| |
| |-
| |
| | [[Consistency]]|| <math>\Pi_1^0</math> || <math>\Pi_1^0</math>
| |
| |-
| |
| | Inconsistency|| <math>\Sigma_1^0</math>|| <math>\Sigma_1^0</math>
| |
| |-
| |
| |}
| |
| | |
| Feferman (2006) cites Väänänen's 2001 result to argue (contra Hintikka) that while satisfiability might be a first-order matter, the question of whether there is a winning strategy for Verifier over all structures in general "lands us squarely in ''full second order logic''" (emphasis Feferman's). Feferman also attacked the claimed usefulness of the extended IF logic, because the sentences in <math>\Pi_1^1</math> do not admit a game-theoretic interpretation.
| |
| | |
| == See also ==
| |
| * [[Game_semantics | Game Semantics]]
| |
| * [[Branching_quantifier | Branching Quantifiers]]
| |
| * [[Dependence_logic | Dependence Logic]]
| |
| | |
| == References ==
| |
| * Hintikka, Jaakko and Gabriel Sandu (1989), "Informational independence as a semantical phenomenon", in ''Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science VIII'' (J. E. Fenstad, et al., eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, {{doi|10.1016/S0049-237X(08)70066-1}}
| |
| * Jaakko Hintikka, 1996, ''The Principles of Mathematics Revisited'', Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-62498-5
| |
| * Jaakko Hintikka and Gabriel Sandu, "Game-theoretical semantics", in ''Handbook of logic and language'', ed. J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen, Elsevier 1996 (1st ed.) Updated in the 2nd second edition of the book (2011).
| |
| *[[Wilfrid Hodges]], 1997, 'Compositional semantics for a language of imperfect information'. ''Journal of the IGPL'' 5: 539–563.
| |
| *[[Daniel Kolak]], ''On Hintikka'', Belmont: Wadsworth 2001 ISBN 0-534-58389-X
| |
| * {{cite journal
| |
| | author = Väänänen, J.
| |
| | url = http://www.math.ucla.edu/~asl/bsl/0704/0704-003.ps
| |
| | title = Second-Order Logic and Foundations of Mathematics
| |
| | journal = Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
| |
| | volume = 7
| |
| | issue = 4
| |
| | year = 2001
| |
| | pages = 504–520
| |
| | doi = 10.2307/2687796
| |
| | jstor = 2687796}}
| |
| * Jaakko Hintikka, "[http://www.math.ucla.edu/~asl/bsl/0803/0803-004.ps Hyperclassical logic (a.k.a. IF logic) and its implications for logical theory]", [[Bulletin of Symbolic Logic]] 8, 2002, 404-423
| |
| *Matti Eklund and Daniel Kolak, “[http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023%2FA%3A1016184410627 Is Hintikka’s Logic First Order?]” [[Synthese]], 131(3): 371-388 June 2002
| |
| *Janssen, Theo M. V. "[http://dare.uva.nl/document/1273 Independent choices and the interpretation of IF logic.]" ''[[Journal of Logic, Language and Information]]'', Volume 11 Issue 3, Summer 2002, pp. 367-387 {{doi|10.1023/A:1015542413718}}
| |
| *[[Daniel Kolak]] and John Symons, "The Results are In: The Scope and Import of Hintikka’s Philosophy" in Daniel Kolak and [http://www.johnsymons.net John Symons], eds., ''Quantifiers, Questions, and Quantum Physics. Essays on the Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka'', Springer 2004, pp. 205-268 ISBN 1-4020-3210-2, {{doi|10.1007/978-1-4020-32110-0_11}}
| |
| *[[Solomon Feferman]], "[http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/hintikka_iia.pdf What kind of logic is “Independence Friendly” logic?]", in ''The Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka'' (Randall E. Auxier and Lewis Edwin Hahn, eds.); Library of Living Philosophers vol. 30, Open Court (2006), 453-469.
| |
| *[[Jouko Väänänen]], 2007, '[http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521876599 Dependence Logic -- A New Approach to Independence Friendly Logic]', Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-87659-9
| |
| * Allen L. Mann, Gabriel Sandu, Merlijn Sevenster (2011) ''Independence-Friendly Logic. A Game-Theoretic Approach'', Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521149347
| |
| * Santiago Figueira, Daniel Gorín, and Rafael Grimson "[http://www.glyc.dc.uba.ar/santiago/papers/iflso.pdf On the Expressive Power of IF-Logic with Classical Negation]", WoLLIC 2011 proceedings, pp. 135-145, ISBN 978-3-642-20919-2
| |
| | |
| == External links ==
| |
| *Tero Tulenheimo, 2009. '[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-if/ Independence friendly logic]'. [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]].
| |
| *[[Wilfrid Hodges]], 2009. '[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-games/ Logic and Games]'. [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]].
| |
| * [http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/IFLogic.html IF logic] on [[Planet Math]]
| |
| | |
| [[Category:Systems of formal logic]]
| |
| [[Category:Philosophical logic]]
| |
| [[Category:Non-classical logic]]
| |
I would like to introduce myself to you, I am Andrew and my spouse doesn't like it at all. For many years he's been living in Mississippi and he doesn't strategy on altering it. What me and my family love is doing ballet but I've been using on new things recently. Office supervising is exactly where my main income comes from but I've always needed my personal company.
Also visit my weblog ... best psychic readings (relevant website www.radyotsm.com)