Skip to content

More precise definition of derivations in natural deduction #300

Open
@beastaugh

Description

@beastaugh

The current definition of a derivation of a sentence !A from a set of assumptions \Gamma in natural deduction is a tree of sentences in which the bottommost sentence is !A, the topmost sentences are in \Gamma or are discharged by an application of a rule, and every sentence in the tree apart from the conclusion is a premise of a correct application of an inference whose conclusion stands immediately below that sentence in the tree.

Unless I'm missing something, this does not appear to rule out infinite derivations. Definitions of the set of derivations in other standard textbooks, e.g. van Dalen's Logic and Structure, use an inductive definition to ensure the finiteness of definitions. I propose that we do the same, and make explicit the fact that this implies that all derivations are finite. This would thereby fix a hole in the proof that the derivability relation is compact, which makes explicit and essential use of the fact that derivations are finite. It's also implicitly used when we arithmetize derivations.

If this sounds like a reasonable idea then I'm happy to put together a patch with a proposed solution. Obviously it's important to preserve the virtues of the current definition, namely its approachability and relative informality.

Any changes would (I think) be restricted to content/first-order-logic/natural-deduction/derivations.tex, although the effects of the correction would be felt in other places where the proposition that the derivability relation is compact is used.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions