Results 1  10
of
82
The Impact of the Lambda Calculus in Logic and Computer Science
 BULLETIN OF SYMBOLIC LOGIC
, 1997
"... One of the most important contributions of A. Church to logic is his invention of the lambda calculus. We present the genesis of this theory and its two major areas of application: the representation of computations and the resulting functional programming languages on the one hand and the represent ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
One of the most important contributions of A. Church to logic is his invention of the lambda calculus. We present the genesis of this theory and its two major areas of application: the representation of computations and the resulting functional programming languages on the one hand and the representation of reasoning and the resulting systems of computer mathematics on the other hand.
Types in logic and mathematics before 1940
 Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
, 2002
"... Abstract. In this article, we study the prehistory of type theory up to 1910 and its development between Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica ([71], 1910–1912) and Church’s simply typed λcalculus of 1940. We first argue that the concept of types has always been present in mathematics, thou ..."
Abstract

Cited by 11 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this article, we study the prehistory of type theory up to 1910 and its development between Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica ([71], 1910–1912) and Church’s simply typed λcalculus of 1940. We first argue that the concept of types has always been present in mathematics, though nobody was incorporating them explicitly as such, before the end of the 19th century. Then we proceed by describing how the logical paradoxes entered the formal systems of Frege, Cantor and Peano concentrating on Frege’s Grundgesetze der Arithmetik for which Russell applied his famous paradox 1 and this led him to introduce the first theory of types, the Ramified Type Theory (rtt). We present rtt formally using the modern notation for type theory and we discuss how Ramsey, Hilbert and Ackermann removed the orders from rtt leading to the simple theory of types stt. We present stt and Church’s own simply typed λcalculus (λ→C 2) and we finish by comparing rtt, stt and λ→C. §1. Introduction. Nowadays, type theory has many applications and is used in many different disciplines. Even within logic and mathematics, there are many different type systems. They serve several purposes, and are formulated in various ways. But, before 1903 when Russell first introduced
Motivations for MathLang
, 2005
"... FOMCAF13 What do we want? Open borders for productive collaboration or that we each stick to our borders without including and benefiting from other input? Do we want war+destruction or solid foundations for wisdom and prosperity? • Do we believe in the chosen framework? Should all the world believe ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
FOMCAF13 What do we want? Open borders for productive collaboration or that we each stick to our borders without including and benefiting from other input? Do we want war+destruction or solid foundations for wisdom and prosperity? • Do we believe in the chosen framework? Should all the world believe in the same framework? Does one framework fit all? Can such a framework exist? • Think of Capitalism, Communism, dictatorship, nationalism, etc... Which one worked in history? • But then, if we are committed to pluralism, are we in danger of being wiped out because being inclusive may well lead to contradictions? • Oscar Wilde: I used to think I was indecisive, but now I’m not sure anymore. FOMCAF13 1Things are not as somber: There is no perfect framework, but some can be invaluable • De Bruijn used to proudly announce: I did it my way. • I quote Dirk van Dalen: The Germans have their 3 B’s, but we Dutch too have our 3 B’s: Beth, Brouwer and de Bruijn. FOMCAF13 2There is a fourth B:
A Correspondence between MartinLöf Type Theory, the Ramified Theory of Types and Pure Type Systems
 Journal of Logic, Language and Information
, 2001
"... In Russell's Ramified Theory of Types rtt, two hierarchical concepts dominate: orders and types. The use of orders has as a consequence that the logic part of rtt is predicative. The concept of order however, is almost dead since Ramsey eliminated it from rtt. This is why we find Church's ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In Russell's Ramified Theory of Types rtt, two hierarchical concepts dominate: orders and types. The use of orders has as a consequence that the logic part of rtt is predicative. The concept of order however, is almost dead since Ramsey eliminated it from rtt. This is why we find Church's simple theory of types (which uses the type concept without the order one) at the bottom of the Barendregt Cube rather than rtt. Despite the disappearance of orders which have a strong correlation with predicativity, predicative logic still plays an influential role in Computer Science. An important example is the proof checker Nuprl, which is based on MartinLöf's Type Theory which uses type universes. Those type universes, and also degrees of expressions in Automath, are closely related to orders. In this paper, we show that orders have not disappeared from modern logic and computer science, rather, orders play a crucial role in understanding the hierarchy of modern systems. In order to achieve our goal, we concentrate on a subsystem of Nuprl. The novelty of our paper lies in: 1) a modest revival of Russell's orders, 1 2) the placing of the historical system rtt underlying the famous Principia Mathematica in a context with a modern system of computer mathematics (Nuprl) and modern type theories (MartinLöf's type theory and PTSs), and 3) the presentation of a complex type system (Nuprl) as a simple and compact PTS.
A formalization of the Ramified Type Theory
, 1994
"... In "Principia Mathematica " [17], B. Russell and A.N. Whitehead propose a type system for higher order logic. This system has become known under the name "ramified type theory". It was invented to avoid the paradoxes, which could be conducted from Frege's &am ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In &quot;Principia Mathematica &quot; [17], B. Russell and A.N. Whitehead propose a type system for higher order logic. This system has become known under the name &quot;ramified type theory&quot;. It was invented to avoid the paradoxes, which could be conducted from Frege's &quot;Begriffschrift&quot; [7]. We give a formalization of the ramified type theory as described in the Principia Mathematica, trying to keep it as close as possible to the ideas of the Principia. As an alternative, distancing ourselves from the Principia, we express notions from the ramified type theory in a lambda calculus style, thus clarifying the type system of Russell and Whitehead in a contemporary setting. Both formalizations are inspired by current developments in research on type theory and typed lambda calculus; see e.g. [3]. In these formalizations, and also when defining &quot;truth&quot;, we will need the notion of substitution. As substitution is not formally defined in the Principia, we have to define it ourselves. Finally, the reaction by Hilbert and Ackermann in [10] on the
A New Approach to Predicative Set Theory
"... We suggest a new basic framework for the WeylFeferman predicativist program by constructing a formal predicative set theory PZF which resembles ZF. The basic idea is that the predicatively acceptable instances of the comprehension schema are those which determine the collections they define in an a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We suggest a new basic framework for the WeylFeferman predicativist program by constructing a formal predicative set theory PZF which resembles ZF. The basic idea is that the predicatively acceptable instances of the comprehension schema are those which determine the collections they define in an absolute way, independent of the extension of the “surrounding universe”. This idea is implemented using syntactic safety relations between formulas and sets of variables. These safety relations generalize both the notion of domainindependence from database theory, and Godel notion of absoluteness from set theory. The language of PZF is typefree, and it reflects real mathematical practice in making an extensive use of statically defined abstract set terms. Another important feature of PZF is that its underlying logic is ancestral logic (i.e. the extension of FOL with a transitive closure operation). 1
Kingman, category and combinatorics
, 2009
"... Kingman’s Theorem on skeleton limits –passing from limits as n! 1 along nh (n 2 N) for enough h> 0 to limits as t! 1 for t 2 R –is generalized to a Baire/measurable setting via a topological approach. Its affinity with a combinatorial theorem due to Kestelman and to Borwein and Ditor and another ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Kingman’s Theorem on skeleton limits –passing from limits as n! 1 along nh (n 2 N) for enough h> 0 to limits as t! 1 for t 2 R –is generalized to a Baire/measurable setting via a topological approach. Its affinity with a combinatorial theorem due to Kestelman and to Borwein and Ditor and another due to Bergelson, Hindman and Weiss is established. As applications, a theory of ‘rational’ skeletons akin to Kingman’s integer skeletons, and more appropriate to a measurable setting, is developed, and two combinatorial results in the spirit of van der Waerden’s celebrated theorem on arithmetic progressions are offered.
Vagueness and Truth
"... In philosophy of logic and elsewhere, it is generally thought that similar problems should be solved by similar means. This advice is sometimes elevated to the status of a principle: the principle of uniform solution. In this paper I will explore the question of what counts as a similar problem and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In philosophy of logic and elsewhere, it is generally thought that similar problems should be solved by similar means. This advice is sometimes elevated to the status of a principle: the principle of uniform solution. In this paper I will explore the question of what counts as a similar problem and consider reasons for subscribing to the principle of uniform solution. 1 Introducing the Principle of Uniform Solution It would be very odd to give different responses to two paradoxes depending on minor, seeminglyirrelevant details of their presentation. For example, it would be unacceptable to deal with the paradox of the heap by invoking a multivalued logic, ̷L∞, say, and yet, when faced with the paradox of the bald man, invoke a supervaluational logic. Clearly these two paradoxes are of a kind—they are both instances of the sorites paradox. And whether the sorites paradox is couched in terms of heaps and grains of sand, or in terms of baldness and the number of hairs on the head, it is essentially the same problem and therefore must be solved by the same means. More generally, we might suggest that similar paradoxes should be resolved by similar means. This advice is sometimes elevated to the status of a principle, which usually goes by the name of the principle of uniform solution. This principle and its motivation will occupy us for much of the discussion in this paper. In particular, I will defend a rather general form of this principle. I will argue that two paradoxes can be thought to be of the same kind because (at a suitable level of abstraction) they share a similar internal structure, or because of external considerations such as the relationships of the paradoxes in question to other paradoxes in the vicinity, or the way they respond to proposed solutions. I will then use this reading of the principle of uniform solution to make a case for the sorites and the liar paradox being of a kind.