ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
Annals of Pure and Applied Logic
Volume 133, Issues 1-3, May 2005, Pages 319-338
Festschrift on the occasion of Helmut Schwichtenberg’s 60th birthday
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Purchase PDF (222 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/j.apal.2004.10.014    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Automated search for Gödel’s proofsstar, open

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Wilfried SiegCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author and Clinton Field

Department of Philosophy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States


Available online 16 November 2004.

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 heuristics 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”.)

star, openThis paper is dedicated to Helmut Schwichtenberg who shares our fascination with automated proof search and who introduced the first author to the intricacies of Gödel’s arguments (through lectures in Münster, a long time ago).


Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding author. Fax: +1 412 268 1400.

Annals of Pure and Applied Logic
Volume 133, Issues 1-3, May 2005, Pages 319-338
Festschrift on the occasion of Helmut Schwichtenberg’s 60th birthday
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.