Papers for
logic system designers
Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.
Medvedev logic proven undecidable and extremely complex problem
Medvedev Logic is Not Decidable. It is π01 -complete. Who Would Have Guessed?
Abstract: This project began as an attempt to prove that Medvedev logic is decidable with the help of generative AI systems. The author (as well as the generative AI systems, or at least they claim to be since I have asked them) was surprised by its eventual conclusion. We prove that Medvedev logic ML, the intermediate logic of finite problems, is Pi-01-complete under computable many-one reductions. Consequently, ML is not recursively enumerable, a fortiori undecidable, and admits no recursively enumerable sound and complete proof calculus. The proof connects the periodic domino problem with intuitionistic formulas through a shared intermediate structure that we call a Wang-Medvedev pair. Such a pair consists of a finite partially ordered set of roles together with demands. Demands define the interaction between roles. A realization labels nonempty subsets of a finite set with these roles, respecting the order and satisfying the demands. We associate a pair with each finite Wang system and show that it has a realization iff the system tiles a finite torus. We then construct an intuitionistic formula that fails on some finite Medvedev frame iff the same pair is realizable. Realizability thus provides the link between periodic tilings and the countermodels.
Different types of negation change how logical reasoning works
Modus Tollens and Counterfactuals and Counterfactual Reasoning Based on Three Types of Negation
Abstract: Modus Tollens (MT) is a classical logical inference rule, while counterfactuals are hypothetical statements that are contrary to facts, and counterfactual reasoning is a process of reasoning based on counterfactuals. Negation is an indispensable core concept in them. In this paper, based on the logical systems LCOI&PLCOI with contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation, we propose three variants of Modus Tollens corresponding to distinct negation types, namely MTC: Modus Tollens based on contradictory negation, MTO: Modus Tollens based on opposite negation, and MTI: Modus Tollens based on intermediary negation. We define the implications within MTC, MTO and MTI, provide the truth value algorithms of MTC, MTO and MTI, and discuss the reducibility of these algorithms. To incorporate these three types of negation into counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning, we differentiate counterfactuals into two types based on whether they possess logical negation, thereby proposing three counterfactuals and counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations. In this paper, we further argue that the three counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations have the same inference form as MTC, MTO and MTI, respectively. In other words, they share the same inference structure. As a result, the truth value algorithms for MTC, MTO and MTI can be as the truth value algorithms for the three counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations. The algorithms indicates that if the first premise of the reasoning is true, the truth values of the reasoning conclusions are identical to the truth values of the three negative premises in the reasoning premises, respectively. This reflects the consistency and accuracy of the truth value algorithms.