Révision 234 CSL17/completeness.tex
completeness.tex (revision 234) | ||
---|---|---|
32 | 32 |
\right) |
33 | 33 |
\end{array} |
34 | 34 |
\] |
35 |
As for the analogous bounded arithmetic theory $S^i_2$ (\cite{Buss86book}, Thm 20, p. 58), $\arith^i$ can prove a minimisation principle for $\cmin{\Sigma^\safe_{i-1}}$ formulas, allowing us to extract the \emph{least} witness of a safe existential, which we apply to $\exists x^\safe , y^\safe . (A_g (\vec u ,\vec x , x , y) \cand y=_2 0)$. From here we are able to readily prove the totality of $A_f(\vec u ; \vec x , z)$, notably relying crucially on classical reasoning.
|
|
35 |
As for the analogous bounded arithmetic theory $S^i_2$ (\cite{Buss86book}, Thm 20, p. 58), $\arith^i$ can prove a \emph{minimisation} principle for $\Sigma^\safe_{i-1}$ formulas, allowing us to extract the \emph{least} witness of a safe existential, which we apply to $\exists x^\safe , y^\safe . (A_g (\vec u ,\vec x , x , y) \cand y=_2 0)$. From here we are able to readily prove the totality of $A_f(\vec u ; \vec x , z)$, notably relying crucially on classical reasoning.
|
|
36 | 36 |
|
37 | 37 |
\end{proof} |
38 | 38 |
|
Formats disponibles : Unified diff