Semantics vs. Syntax

Model Theory and Proof Theory

  • Entailment is semantic

  •  

  •  

  •  

  •  

  •  

  •  

Overview

Entailment/validity is a semantic concept.

Semantics (as opposed to syntax)

  • Whether an argument is valid depends on truth and possibility.

  • Truth and possibility depend on what the premises and conclusions mean.

  • This makes proving validity/entailment difficult—you have to make sure you think of every possible way things could turn out.

Two ways to define "good inference/argument":

Semantics and syntax

Proof theory (next topic)

Model theory

  • Focuses on the structure of phrases and sentences (syntax).

  • Defines "good inference/argument" in terms of patterns of reasoning.

  • Easy to prove that an inference/ argument is good.

  • Notation: P1 ,...,Pn  C

  • Focuses on the meanings of words, phrases, and sentences (semantics).

  • Defines "good inference/argument" in terms of entailment/validity.

  • Easy to prove that an inference/ argument is bad.

  • Notation: P1 ,...,Pn  C

Math frequently blurs the line between these two, and that's mostly ok.

⊨ and ⊢

  • In practice, mathematicians usually call  entailment  and don't use .

  • This is relatively harmless.

  • When learning about logics, however, this distinction is valuable, because it highlights the two very different methods we can use to distinguish good reasoning from bad.

Soundness and completeness

Sidebar

  • Distinguishing  and  is also part of understanding Godel's Incompleteness Theorems, which are two of the most important results in logic.

  • Whenever we develop a model theory and a proof theory for a specific kind of reasoning, we hope that

    • everything we can prove is valid   (i.e., ⊢    , known as soundness)  and

    • everything that's valid can be proved (⊨    , known as completeness).

  • In fact, however, we can only have one or the other for most logics we care about, including type theory and any logic for any part of mathematics.

  • Additionally, for all these logics, we can never truly prove soundness.

 

Math frequently blurs the line between these two, and that's mostly ok.

⊨ and ⊢

⊢   

  ⟹  

soundness:

completeness:

  • It turns out that it's rarely possible to have both soundness and completeness:

    • It's possible for first-order logiclogic for and, or, not, if, all, some, and is.

    • It's not possible for type theory or any mathematics.

  • .

Model Theory and Proof Theory

By dusttuck

Model Theory and Proof Theory

  • 14