Is it necessary for a logical system to be both sound and complete in order to be decidable?
2026-02-23 01:20:02.1771809602
Are soundness and completeness necessary for decidability?
403 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LOGIC
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Determine the truth value and validity of the propositions given
- Is this a commonly known paradox?
- Help with Propositional Logic Proof
- Symbol for assignment of a truth-value?
- Find the truth value of... empty set?
- Do I need the axiom of choice to prove this statement?
- Prove that any truth function $f$ can be represented by a formula $φ$ in cnf by negating a formula in dnf
Related Questions in DECIDABILITY
- Deciding wether a language is regular, in the arithmetic hierarchy
- SAT preserving conversion of statement to existential one
- The elementary theory of finite commutative rings
- Is the sign of a real number decidable?
- Relation between the monadic and two-variable fragment of first order logic
- Literature about decidable and undecidable theories
- Flaw in self-referential proof that all languages are undecidable
- A recursively enumerable theory without a decidable set of axioms.
- Proving decidability of $(\mathbb N, +)$ with Quantifier elimination and evaluating basic formulas
- Showing that Presburger arithmetic is decidable by deciding if $\mathbb N \models \varphi$, but does it give provability in the axioms?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
If you take, say, the classical semantics of propositional logic as granted, then it's very easy to define a formal system that is neither sound nor complete, yet perfectly decidable.
For example, consider this system:
This is clearly decidable: a formula is provable exactly if it is an axiom, which is easy to check. But it is not sound (because it proves $A\land\neg A$), and it is not complete (because $\neg A\lor\neg\neg A$ is not provable, yet it is valid -- remember that we're assuming the usual semantics).
A thornier question is: Given a deductive system, can we find a semantics that it is sound and complete with respect to? The main problem here is to delineate exactly what would qualify as a "semantics". If we are too strict here, we might find ourselves excluding even tested and true ideas such as Kripke frames. On the other hand if we're too liberal the question could easily become trivial, because one could just slap the name "semantics" onto the formal system itself or something that simulates it.