Révision 183 CSL17/arithmetic.tex
arithmetic.tex (revision 183) | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 1 |
\section{An arithmetic for the polynomial hierarchy} |
2 | 2 |
%Our base language is $\{ 0, \succ{} , + , \times, \smsh , |\cdot| , \leq \}$. |
3 |
Our base language is defined by the set of functions (and constants) symbols $\{ 0, \succ{} , + , \times, \smsh , |\cdot|\}$ and the set of predicate symbols |
|
3 |
Our base language is defined by the set of functions (and constants) symbols $\{ 0, \succ{} , + , \times, \smsh , |\cdot|, \hlf{}.\}$ and the set of predicate symbols
|
|
4 | 4 |
$\{\leq, \safe, \normal \}$. |
5 | 5 |
We use classical logic connectives $\neg$, $\cand$, $\cor$, $\forall$, $\exists$. The formula $A \cimp B$ will be a notation for $\neg A \cor B$. |
6 | 6 |
We will also use as shorthand notations: |
... | ... | |
8 | 8 |
We call \textit{atomic formulas} formulas of the form $(s\leq t)$ or $(s=t)$. |
9 | 9 |
As we are in classical logic, we will assume, without loss of generality, that formulas are in \textit{De Morgan normal form}, that is to say that in formulas negation can only occur on atomic formulas, and that there is not any occurrence of subformula of the form $\neg \neg A$. |
10 | 10 |
|
11 |
In the sequel $\succ{0}(x)$ stand for $2\cdot x$ and $\succ{1}(x)$ stand for $\succ{}(2\cdot x)$, |
|
11 | 12 |
Now, let us describe the axioms we are considering.The $\basic$ axioms are as follows: |
12 | 13 |
\[ |
13 | 14 |
\begin{array}{l} |
... | ... | |
19 | 20 |
\forall x^\safe, y^\safe . \safe(x+y)\\ |
20 | 21 |
\forall u^\normal, x^\safe . \safe(u\times x) \\ |
21 | 22 |
\forall u^\normal , v^\normal . \safe (u \smsh v)\\ |
22 |
\forall u^\normal \safe(u) |
|
23 |
\forall u^\normal \safe(u) \\ |
|
24 |
\forall u^\normal \safe(\hlf{u})\\ |
|
25 |
\forall x^\safe \safe(|x|) |
|
23 | 26 |
\end{array} |
24 | 27 |
\] |
28 |
\patrick{did I type writly the 2 last axioms?} |
|
29 |
|
|
30 |
and the list of axioms of Appendix \ref{appendix:arithmetic}, coming from \cite{Buss86book}. |
|
31 |
|
|
25 | 32 |
\anupam{in fact, we use essentially the same language, so just take Buss' Basic axioms after proper typing. Should also add the symbol $\hlf{\cdot}$ for binary predecessor then we have the full language of bounded arithmetic.} |
26 | 33 |
|
27 | 34 |
|
Formats disponibles : Unified diff