User:IssaRice/Computability and logic/Semantic completeness: Difference between revisions

From Machinelearning
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Semantic completeness is sometimes written as: if <math>\Sigma \models \phi</math>, then <math>\Sigma \vdash \phi</math>.
Semantic completeness is sometimes written as: if <math>\Sigma \models \phi</math>, then <math>\Sigma \vdash \phi</math>.
Semantic completeness is the completeness that is the topic of Godel's completeness theorem.


Semantic completeness differs from [[../Negation completeness|negation completeness]].
Semantic completeness differs from [[../Negation completeness|negation completeness]].

Revision as of 05:41, 21 December 2018

Semantic completeness is sometimes written as: if Σϕ, then Σϕ.

Semantic completeness is the completeness that is the topic of Godel's completeness theorem.

Semantic completeness differs from negation completeness.

Definition

I want to make sure all these definitions are saying the same thing, so let me list some from several textbooks so I can explicitly compare.

Smith's definition: a logic is semantically complete iff for any set of wffs Σ and any sentence ϕ, if Σϕ then Σϕ.[1]

Leary/Kristiansen's definition: A deductive system consisting of logical axioms Λ and a collection of rules of inference is said to be complete iff for every set of nonlogical axioms Σ and every L-formula ϕ, if Σϕ, then Σϕ.[2]

References

  1. Peter Smith. An Introduction to Godel's Theorems. p. 33.
  2. Leary; Kristiansen. A Friendly Introduction to Mathematical Logic. p. 74.