Skip to main content

Automated Search for Gödel’s Proofs

  • Chapter
Deduction, Computation, Experiment

Abstract

We present strategies and heuristics underlying a search procedure that finds proofs for Gödel’s incompleteness theorems at an abstract axiomatic level. As axioms we take for granted the representability and derivability conditions for the central syntactic notions as well as the diagonal lemma for constructing self-referential sentences. The strategies are logical ones and have been developed to search for natural deduction proofs in classical first-order logic. The heuristics are mostly of a very general mathematical character and are concerned with the goal-directed use of definitions and lemmata. When they are specific to the meta-mathematical context, these heuistics allow us, for example, to move between the object-and meta-theory. Instead of viewing this work as high-level proof search, it can be regarded as a first step in a proof-planning framework: the next refining steps would consist in verifying the axiomatically given conditions. Comparisons with the literature are detailed in Section 4. (The general mathematical heuristics are indeed general: in Appendix B we show that they, together with two simple algebraic facts and the logical strategies, suffice to find a proof of “√2 is not rational”.)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. K. Ammon: An automatic proof of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. Artificial Intelligence 61 (1993) pp 291–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. G. Boolos: The logic of provability (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1993)

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Bröning, M. Thielscher and W. Bibel: Letter to the editor. Artificial Intelligence 61 (1993) pp 353–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. A. Bundy, F. Giunchiglia, A. Villafiorita and T. Walsh: An incompleteness theorem via abstraction. Technical Report #9302-15 (Istituto per la ricerca scientifica e tecnologica, Trento 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. Bundy, D. Basin, D. Hutter and A. Ireland: Rippling: Meta-level guidance for mathematical reasoning (Book manuscript 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Byrnes: Proof search and normal forms in natural deduction. Ph.D. Thesis (Department of Philosophy, Carnegie Mellon University 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. J. Cohen: Set theory and the continuum hypothesis (Benjamin, Reading Mass. 1966)

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Dedekind: Uber die Einföhrung neuer Funktionen in der Mathematik (Habilitationsrede 1854, pp 428–38) In: Gesammelte mathematische Werke, ed by Fricke, Noether and Ore, vol. 3 (Vieweg 1933)

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. Fearnley-Sander: Review of Quaife [16]. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Feferman: Inductively presented systems and the formalization of metamathematics. In: Logic Colloquium’ 80, ed by D. van Dalen, D. Lascar and T. J. Smiley (North-Holland, Amsterdam 1982) pp 95–128

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Feferman: Finitary inductively presented logics. In: Logic Colloquium’ 88, ed by R. Ferro et al. (North-Holland, Amsterdam 1988) pp 191–220

    Google Scholar 

  12. F. Fitch: Symbolic Logic (The Ronald Press Company, New York 1952)

    Google Scholar 

  13. K. Gödel: Uber formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte för Mathematik und Physik 38 (1931) pp 173–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. M. Löb: Solution of a problem of Leon Henkin. J. Symbolic Logic 20 (1955) pp 115–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. A. Quaife: Automated proofs of Löb’s theorem and Gödel’s two incompleteness theorems. Journal of Automated Reasoning 4 (1988) pp 219–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. A. Quaife: Automated Development of Fundamental Mathematical Theories (Kluwer, Dordrecht 1992)

    Google Scholar 

  17. N. Shankar: Metamathematics, Machines, and Gödel’s Proof. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science 38 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1994)

    Google Scholar 

  18. W. Sieg: Elementary proof theory. Technical Report 297 (Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences, Stanford 1978) 104 pp

    Google Scholar 

  19. W. Sieg: Mechanisms and Search (Aspects of Proof Theory). AILA Preprint (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  20. W. Sieg and J. Byrnes: Normal natural deduction proofs (in classical logic). Studia Logica 60 (1998) pp 67–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. W. Sieg and S. Cittadini: Normal natural deduction proofs (in non-classical logics). Technical Report No. CMU-PHIL-130 (2002) 29 pp. The paper has since been published in: Mechanizing Mathematical Reasoning, ed by Hutter and Stephan (Springer, 2005) pp 169–191

    Google Scholar 

  22. W. Sieg, I. Lindstrom and S. Lindstrom: Gödel’s incompleteness theorems-a computer-based course in elementary proof theory. In: University-Level Computer-Assisted Instruction at Stanford 1968–80, ed by P. Suppes (Stanford 1981) pp 183–193

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sieg, W., Field, C. (2008). Automated Search for Gödel’s Proofs. In: Lupacchini, R., Corsi, G. (eds) Deduction, Computation, Experiment. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-0784-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics