896
Comment:
|
897
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 1: | Line 1: |
= Logical Implication or Entailment = |
[[BR]] |
Line 5: | Line 4: |
\section{Logical Implication or Entailment} |
|
Line 11: | Line 12: |
To show $X \models y$, show that $X \Rightarrow y$ is a tautology. We call a tautology of the form [[latex2($$A \models B$$)]] a Logical Implication. | To show $X \models y$, show that $X \Rightarrow y$ is a tautology. We call a tautology of the form $A \models B$ a Logical Implication. |
\section{Logical Implication or Entailment} Consider \[ X \models y \] where X is some set of premises and y is the conclusion. This simply means that the conjuction of all the premises entail the conclusion. We say that $X \models y$ if and only if all the models of $X$ are models of $y$. To show $X \models y$, show that $X \Rightarrow y$ is a tautology. We call a tautology of the form $A \models B$ a Logical Implication. In predicate calculus, we use [[latex2($$\vdash$$)]] to denote deduction \[ \nabla \vdash Q \] where $\nabla$ is the set of assumptions and $Q$ is the conclusion is read ''$Q$ is deduced from $\nabla$.'' If $\nabla = \emptyset$, often denoted $\vdash Q$, then it is call a proof. That is $Q$ is deduced soley from the axioms. (FirstOrderMathematicalLogicAngeloMargaris)
See LogicNotes
Back to ComputerTerms