Révision 235 CSL17/completeness.tex
completeness.tex (revision 235) | ||
---|---|---|
12 | 12 |
|
13 | 13 |
For predicative recursion, the basic idea is to follow the classical simulation of primitive recursion in arithmetic, adapted to recursion on notation, by encoding the sequence of recursive calls as an integer $w$. |
14 | 14 |
The main technical difficulty is the representation of (de)coding functions $\beta (k, x)$ (``the $k$th element of the sequence $x$'') and $\langle x,y \rangle$ (``the pair $(x,y)$''). |
15 |
For this we represent instead the length-bounded variants of these functions given towards the end of Sect.~\ref{sect:prelims}, relying on the bounded minimisation and polychecking results, Lemmas~\ref{lem:bounded-minimisation} and \ref{lem:bounded-minimisation}, to find appropriate length bounds.
|
|
15 |
For this we represent instead the length-bounded variants of these functions given towards the end of Sect.~\ref{sect:prelims}, relying on the bounded minimisation and polychecking results, Lemmas~\ref{lem:bounded-minimisation} and \ref{lem:polychecking}, to find appropriate length bounds.
|
|
16 | 16 |
% which is sorted in a suitable way so that the formula $A_f$ is in the same class $\Sigma^{\safe}_i$ as $A_g$, $A_{h_0}$ and $A_{h_1}$. This can be obtained by defining the predicate $\beta (k, w, y)$ with $k$ in $\normal$ and $w$, $y$ in $\safe$. |
17 | 17 |
|
18 | 18 |
|
... | ... | |
33 | 33 |
\end{array} |
34 | 34 |
\] |
35 | 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 |
|
|
37 | 36 |
\end{proof} |
38 | 37 |
|
39 | 38 |
|
Formats disponibles : Unified diff