consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Post on 24-Jun-2015

313 Views

Category:

Science

1 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

In this paper, we prove that S21 can prove consistency of PV−, the system obtained from Cook and Urquhart’s PV [3] by removing induction. This apparently contradicts Buss and Ignjatovi ́c [2], since they prove that PV ̸⊢ Con(PV−). However, what they actually prove is unprovability of consistency of the system which is obtained from PV− by addition of propositional logic and BASICe-axioms. On the other hand, our PV− is strictly equational and our proof relies on it.

TRANSCRIPT

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic

inside a bounded arithmetic

Yoriyuki Yamagata

Sendai Logic Seminar, Oct. 31, 2014

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Motivation

Ultimate Goal

Conjecutre

S12 6= S2

where S i2, i = 1, 2, . . . are Buss’s hierarchies of bounded

arithmetics and S2 =⋃

i=1,2,... S i2

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Motivation

Approach using consistency statement

If S2 ` Con(S12 ), we have S1

2 6= S2.

Theorem (Pudlak, 1990)S2 6` Con(S1

2 )

QuestionCan we find a theory T such that S2 ` Con(T ) butS1

2 6` Con(T )?

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Motivation

Unprovability

Theorem (Buss and Ignjatovic 1995)

S12 6` Con(PV−)

PV− : Cook & Urquhart’s equational theory PV minusinductionBuss and Ignjatovic enrich PV− by propositional logic andBASIC e-axioms

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Motivation

Provability

Theorem (Beckmann 2002)

S12 ` Con(PV−)

if PV− is formulated without substitution

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Main results

Main result

Theorem

S12 ` Con(PV−)

Even if PV− is formulated with substitutionOur PV− is equational

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Cook & Urquhart’s PV : language

We formulate PV as an equational theory of binary digits.

1. Constant : ε

2. Function symbols for all polynomial time functionss0, s1, ε

n, projni , . . .

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Cook Urquhart’s PV : axioms

1. Recursive definition of functions

1.1 Composition1.2 Recursion

2. Equational axioms

3. Substitutiont(x) = u(x)

t(s) = u(s) (1)

4. PIND for all formulas

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Consistency proof of PV− inside S12

Theorem (Consistency theorem)

S12 ` Con(PV−) (2)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Soundness theorem

TheoremLet

1. π `PV− 0 = 1

2. r ` t = u be a sub-proof of π

3. ρ : sequence of substitution such that tρ is closed

4. σ ` 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v , α

Then,∃τ, τ ` 〈u, ρ〉 ↓ v , α (3)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Soundness theorem

Theorem (S12 )

Let

1. π `PV− 0 = 1, U > ||π||2. r ` t = u be a sub-proof of π

3. ρ : sequence of substitution such that tρ is closed and||ρ|| ≤ U − ||r ||

4. σ ` 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v , α and |||σ|||,Σα∈αM(α) ≤ U − ||r ||Then,

∃τ, τ ` 〈u, ρ〉 ↓ v , α (4)

s.t. |||τ ||| ≤ |||σ|||+ ||r ||

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness theorem

Consistency of big-step semantics

Lemma (S12 )

There is no computation which proves 〈ε, ρ〉 ↓ s1ε

Proof.Immediate from the form of inference rules

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Substitution)

〈t, ρ2〉 ↓ v

〈x , ρ1[t/x ]ρ2〉 ↓ v (5)

where ρ1 does not contain a substitution to x .

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (ε, s0, s1)

〈ε, ρ〉 ↓ ε (6)

〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈si t, ρ〉 ↓ siv (7)

where i is either 0 or 1.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Constant function)

〈εn(t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ ε (8)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Projection)

〈ti , ρ〉 ↓ vi〈projni (t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ vi (9)

for i = 1, · · · , n.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Composition)If f is defined by g(h(t)),

〈g(w), ρ〉 ↓ v 〈h(v), ρ〉 ↓ w 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈f (t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ v (10)

t : members of t1, . . . , tn such that t are not numerals

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Recursion - ε)

〈gε(v1, . . . , vn), ρ〉 ↓ v 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ ε 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈f (t, t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ v (11)

t : members ti of t1, . . . , tn such that ti are not numerals

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Inference rules for 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

Definition (Recursion - s0, s1)

〈gi(v0,w , v), ρ〉 ↓ v 〈f (v0, v), ρ〉 ↓ w {〈t, ρ〉 ↓ siv0} 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈f (t, t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ v(12)

i = 0, 1t : members ti of t1, . . . , tn such that ti are not numeralsThe clause {〈t, ρ〉 ↓ siv0} is there if t is not a numeral

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Big-step semantics

Computation (sequence)

Definition

Computation sequence A DAG (or sequence with pointers)which is built by these inference rules

Computation statement A form 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ vt : main termρ : environmentv : value

Conclusion A computation statement which are not used forassumptions of inferences

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Upper bound of Godel number of main terms

Lemma (S12 )

M(σ) : the maximal size of main terms in σ.

M(σ) ≤ maxg∈Φ{(||g ||+ 1) · (C + ||g ||+ |||σ|||+ T )}

Φ = Base(t1, . . . , tm, ρ1, . . . , ρm)

T = ||t1||+ · · ·+ ||tm||+ ||ρ1||+ · · ·+ ||ρm||

t1, . . . , tm : main terms of conclusionsρ1, . . . , ρm : environments of conclusions σ.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Size of environments

Lemma (S12 )

Assume σ ` 〈t1, ρ1〉 ↓ v1, . . . , 〈tm, ρm〉 ↓ vm.If 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v ∈ σ then ρ is a subsequence of one of theρ1, . . . , ρm.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Size of value

Lemma (S12 )

If σ contains 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v , then ||v || ≤ |||σ|||.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Size of arguments

Lemma (S12 )

σ contains 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v and u is a subterm of ts.t. u is a numeralThen,

||u|| ≤ max{|||σ|||,T} (13)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of bound for Godel numbers of main terms

σ = σ1, . . . σnM(σi) be the size of the main term of σi .Prove

M(σi) ≤ maxg∈Φ{(||g ||+ 1) · (C + ||g ||+ |||σ|||+ T )} (14)

by induction on n − iIf σi is a conclusion, M(σi) ≤ TAssume σi is an assumption of σj , j > i .

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of bound for Godel numbers of main terms

Assume that M(σj) satisfies induction hypothesisWe analyze different cases of the inference which derives σj

〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈x , ρ′[t/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v (15)

Since ||t|| ≤ ||ρ′[t/x ]ρ|| ≤ T , we are done

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of bound for Godel numbers of main terms

〈f1(v1), ρ〉 ↓ w1, . . . , 〈fl1(v1,w), ρ〉 ↓ wl1 , 〈tk1 , ρ〉 ↓ v21 , . . . , 〈tkl2 , ρ〉 ↓ v

2l2

〈f (t), ρ〉 ↓ v(16)

v 1, v 2,w , v are numeralstk1 , . . . , tkl2 are a subsequence t.f1, . . . , fl1 ∈ Φthe elements of v 1 come from either v 2 or t that are numerals.

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of bound for Godel numbers of main terms

||tk1||, . . . , ||tkl2 || ≤ ||f (t)|| (17)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of bound for Godel numbers of main terms

||fk(v 1)|| ≤ ||fk ||+ ar(fk) · (C + |||σ|||+ T ) (18)

≤ maxg∈Φ{||g ||+ ar(g) · (C + |||σ|||+ T )} (19)

≤ maxg∈Φ{(||g ||+ 1) · (C + |||σ|||+ T )} (20)

where t1 are terms ti s.t. tiρ is a numeral

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Polynomial bound of number of symbols in

computation sequence

CorollaryThere is a polynomial p such that

||σ|| ≤ p(|||σ|||, ||α||) (21)

where ||α|| are conclusions of σ

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Proof of Corollary

Proof.

M(σ) ≤ maxg∈Φ{(||g ||+ 1) · (C + ||g ||+ |||σ|||+ T )} (22)

≤ (||α||+ 1) · (C + ||α||+ |||σ|||+ T ) (23)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Bounding Godel numbers by number of nodes

Polynomial bound of Godel number of

computation sequence

Definition

`B α⇔def ∃σ, |||σ||| ≤ B ∧ σ ` α (24)

Corollary`B α is a Σb

1-formula

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Backward lemma

Lemma (S12 )

If f has a defining axiom

f (c(t), t) = tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t) (25)

c(t) : ε, s0t, s1t, t

`B 〈f (c(t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α

⇒`B+||(25)|| 〈tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α (26)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Forward lemma

Lemma (S12 )

`B 〈tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α

⇒`B+||(25)|| 〈f (c(t), t), ρ〉 ↓B v , α (27)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Fusion lemma

Lemma (S12 )

σ `n α (28)

〈f (v), ρ〉 ↓ v , 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v ∈ σ (29)

v are numeralsThen ∃τ such that

τ ` 〈f (t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α (30)

τ |n = σ (31)

|||τ ||| ≤ |||σ|||+ 1 (32)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Constructor lemma

Lemma (S12 )

〈ε, ρ〉 ↓ v ∈ σ ⇒ v ≡ ε

〈si t, ρ〉 ↓ v ∈ σ ⇒ v ≡ siv0, 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v0 ∈ σ

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Proof of Backward lemmaFor the case that f = g(h1(x), . . . , hn(x))

〈g(w), ρ〉 ↓ v 〈h(v), ρ〉 ↓ w 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈f (t1, . . . , tn), ρ〉 ↓ v

By Fusion lemma, τ1 ` 〈g(w), ρ〉 ↓ v , 〈h(t), ρ〉 ↓ w where|||τ1||| ≤ |||σ|||+ #hBy Fusion lemma τ ` 〈g(h(t)), ρ〉 ↓ v

|||τ ||| ≤ |||τ1|||+ 1

≤ |||σ|||+ #h + 1

≤ |||σ|||+ ||g(h(t))||

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Proof of Forward lemma

α,

β1, 〈t0, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈h1(t), ρ〉 ↓ w1 , . . .

〈g(h(t)), ρ〉 ↓ v

is transformed to

αg(w),

β1

〈h1(v), ρ〉 ↓ w1 , . . . , 〈t0, ρ〉 ↓ v

〈f (t), ρ〉 ↓ v .

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Soundness of defining axioms

Proof of soundness theorem - defining axioms

f (c(t), t) = tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t)

By Backward and Forward lemma,

`B 〈f (c(t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α⇒`B+||r || 〈tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α

`B 〈tf ,c(t, f (t, t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α⇒`B+||r || 〈f (c(t), t), ρ〉 ↓ v , α

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Substitution I

Lemma (S12 )

U ,V : large integers

σ ` 〈t1[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . . , 〈tm[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ vm, α (33)

|||σ||| ≤ U − ||t1[u/x ]|| − · · · − ||tm[u/x ]|| (34)

M(σ) ≤ V (35)

Then,

∃τ, τ ` 〈t1, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v1 . . . , 〈tm, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ vm, α (36)

|||τ ||| ≤ |||σ|||+ ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]|| (37)

M(τ) ≤ M(σ) (38)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Substitution IILemma (S1

2 )U ,V : large integers

σ ` 〈t1, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . . , 〈tm, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ vm, α (39)

|||σ||| ≤ U − ||t1[u/x ]|| − · · · − ||tm[u/x ]|| (40)

M(σ) ≤ V (41)

Then,

∃τ, τ ` 〈t1[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ v1 . . . , 〈tm[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ vm, α (42)

|||τ ||| ≤ |||σ|||+ ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]|| (43)

M(τ) ≤ M(σ) · ||u|| (44)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

By induction on ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||Sub-induction on the length of σCase analysis of the last inference of σ

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

〈s, ρ1〉 ↓ v

〈y , ρ′[s/y ]ρ1〉 ↓ vR

Two possibility:

1. t1 ≡ x and u ≡ y

2. t1 ≡ y

2 is impossible

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

.... σ1

〈s, ρ1〉 ↓ v

〈x [y/x ], ρ′[s/y ]ρ1〉 ↓ vR

M(σ1) ≤ M(σ), we can apply IH to σ1

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

Let τ be .... τ1

〈s, ρ1〉 ↓ v

〈y , [s/y ]ρ1〉 ↓ v

〈x , [y/x ][s/y ]ρ1〉 ↓ v

|||τ ||| ≤ |||τ1|||+ 2

≤ |||σ1|||+ ||t2[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||+ 2

≤ |||σ1|||+ ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||+ 1

≤ |||σ|||+ ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

The case that R is not a substitutionWe consider two cases

1. t1[u/x ] ≡ f (u1[u/x ], . . . , ul [u/x ])

2. t1[u/x ] ≡ u

We only consider the first caseAssume u1[u/x ], . . . , ul [u/x ] is partitioned intou1

1 [u/x ], . . . , u1l1[u/x ] which are not numeral, and numerals

u21 [u/x ], . . . , u2

l2[u/x ]

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

β, 〈u11 [u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ v 1

1 , . . . , 〈u1l1[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ v 1

l1

〈t1[u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ vR

|||σ0||| ≤ |||σ||| − 1 + l1

≤ U − ||t1[u/x ]|| − · · · − ||tm[u/x ]|| − 1 + l1

≤ U − ||u11 [u/x ]|| − · · · − ||u1

l1[u/x ]|| − · · ·− ||t2[u/x ]|| − · · · − ||tm[u/x ]||

σ0 : The computation which is obtained by removing the lastelement of σ and make all 〈uj [u/x ], ρ〉 ↓ v 1

j conclusions

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

τ0 ` 〈u11 , [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v 1

1 , . . . , 〈u1l1 , [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v 1

l1 , . . . (45)

|||τ0||| ≤ |||σ0|||+ ||u11 [u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||u1

l1[u/x ]||+||t2[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]|| (46)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

We add the proof of 〈u2k2 , [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v 1

k2 for all k2 = 1, . . . , l2

whose numbers of nodes are bounded by ||u2k2[u/x ]||+ 1

τ1 ` 〈u1, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . . , 〈ul , [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ vl , . . . (47)

|||τ1||| ≤ |||σ0|||+ ||u1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||ul [u/x ]||+ l2 + ||t2[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]|| (48)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution I

τ ` 〈t1, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . . , 〈tm, [u/x ]ρ〉 ↓ vm, α (49)

|||τ ||| ≤ |||τ1|||+ 1

≤ |||σ0|||+ ||u1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||uk [u/x ]||+l2 + ||t2[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||+ 1

≤ |||σ|||+ l1 + ||u1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||ul [u/x ]||+l2 + ||t2[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||+ 1

≤ |||σ|||+ ||t1[u/x ]||+ · · ·+ ||tm[u/x ]||

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of Substitution II

Similar to the proof of Substitution I

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Substitution lemma

Proof of soundness theorem - substitution.... r1

t = ut[t0/x ] = u[t0/x ]

〈t[t0/x ], ρ〉 ↓B v (Assumption)

〈t, [t0/x ]ρ〉 ↓B+||t[t0/x]|| v (Substitution I)

Since ||[t0/x ]ρ|| ≤ U − ||r ||+ ||[t0/x ]|| ≤ U − ||r1||

〈u, [t0/x ]ρ〉 ↓B+||t[t0/x]||+||r1|| v (IH)

〈u[t0/x ], ρ〉 ↓B+||t[t0/x]||+||r1||+||u[t0/x]|| v (Substitution II)

Since B + ||t[t0/x ]||+ ||r1||+ ||u[t0/x ]|| ≤ B + ||r ||

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Equality axioms

Equality axioms - transitivity.... r1

t = u

.... r2u = w

t = w

By induction hypothesis,

σ `B 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v ⇒ ∃τ, τ `B+||r1|| 〈u, ρ〉 ↓ v (50)

Since

||ρ|| ≤ U − ||r || ≤ U − ||r2|||||τ ||| ≤ U − ||r ||+ ||r1||

≤ U − ||r2||

By induction hypothesis, ∃δ, δ `B+||r1||+||r2|| 〈w , ρ〉 ↓ v

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Equality axioms

Equality axioms - substitution

.... r1

t = uf (t) = f (u)

σ : computation of 〈f (t), ρ〉 ↓ v .We only consider that the case t is not a numeral

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Equality axioms

Proof of soundness of equality axiomsσ has a form

〈f1(v0, v), ρ〉 ↓ w1 , . . . , 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v0, 〈tk1 , ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . .

〈f (t, t2, . . . , tk), ρ〉 ↓ v

∃σ1, s.t. σ1 ` 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v0, 〈f (t, t2, . . . , tk), ρ〉 ↓ v , α

|||σ1||| ≤ |||σ|||+ 1 (51)

≤ U − ||r ||+ 1 (52)

≤ U − ||r1|| (53)

and

||f (t, t2, . . . , tk)||+ Σα∈αM(α) ≤ U − ||r ||+ ||f (t, t2, . . . , tk)||≤ U − ||r1|| (54)

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Equality axioms

Proof of soundness of equality axioms

By IH, ∃τ1 s.t. τ1 ` 〈u, ρ〉 ↓ v0, 〈f (t, t2, . . . , tk), ρ〉 ↓ v , α and|||τ1||| ≤ |||σ1|||+ ||r1||

〈f1(v0, v), ρ〉 ↓ w1 , . . . , 〈t, ρ〉 ↓ v0, 〈tk1 , ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . .

〈f (t, t2, . . . , tk), ρ〉 ↓ v

Consistency proof of a feasible arithmetic inside a bounded arithmetic

Consistency of PV-

Equality axioms

Proof of soundness of equality axioms

〈f1(v0, v), ρ〉 ↓ w1 , . . . , 〈u, ρ〉 ↓ v0, 〈tk1 , ρ〉 ↓ v1, . . .

〈f (u, t2, . . . , tk), ρ〉 ↓ v

Let this derivation be τ

|||τ ||| ≤ |||σ1|||+ ||r1||+ 1

≤ |||σ|||+ ||r1||+ 2

≤ |||σ|||+ ||r ||

top related