proving the validity of an argument
play

Proving the Validity of an Argument Torben Amtoft Kansas State - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 08, 2022 •16 likes •246 views

Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proving the Validity of an Argument Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Torben Amtoft Kansas State

  1. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proving the Validity of an Argument Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  2. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  3. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Reminder In Fitch format, an argument takes the form P 1 premises · · · P n Q conclusion ◮ Such an argument is valid if conclusion Q is true whenever premises P 1 . . . P n are. ◮ A valid argument if sound if the premises are true. Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  4. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proving and Disproving Validity ◮ To show that an argument is not valid, use counterexamples: a world where the premises are true, but conclusion false. ◮ How to show that an argument is valid? (topic of Section 2.2-2.4) ◮ naive approach: consider all worlds where premise is true, and show that also conclusion is true. ◮ feasible approach: construct a proof Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  5. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity A Valid Argument RightOf(b,c) LeftOf(d,e) b = d why? LeftOf(c,e) Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  6. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity A Valid Argument RightOf(b,c) LeftOf(d,e) b = d why? LeftOf(c,e) Informal reasoning: (p.52) We are told that b is to the right of c . So c must be to the left of b , since right of and left of are inverses of one another. And since b = d , c is left of d , by the indiscernibility of identicals. But we are also told that d is left of e , and consequently c is to the left of e , by the transitivity of left of . This is our desired conclusion. Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  7. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity A Formal Proof We establish a series of intermediate results: 1. RightOf(b,c) 2. LeftOf(d,e) 3. b = d 4. LeftOf(c,b) from 1, since LeftOf and RightOf are inverses 5. LeftOf(c,d) from 4 and 3, using identity elimination 6. LeftOf(c,e) from 5 and 2, since LeftOf is transitive Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  8. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Identity Elimination (= Elim) ◮ If b is a cube and b equals c , then also c is a cube ◮ If John is happy and John is the father of Max, then the father of Max is happy In general (cf. p. 56) P ( t ) · · · t = u · · · P ( u ) ⊲ Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  9. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity A Valid Arithmetic Argument x > 2 x · x > x + x why? Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  10. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity A Valid Arithmetic Argument 1. x > 2 2. 2 > 0 fact 3. x > 0 from 1 and 2, since > is transitive 4. x · x > 2 · x from 1 and 3, using law of arithmetic: multiplying by positive number preserves inequalities 5. 2 · x = x + x fact 6. x · x > x + x from 4 and 5, using = Elim Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  11. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity System F, vs. Fitch system F (p.54) Fitch (p.58) what is? formal system software package application domain general purpose tuned for Tarski’s world Proof rules: general = Elim , = Intro = Elim , = Intro ∧ Elim , ∧ Intro ∧ Elim , ∧ Intro etc. etc. shortcuts can be added Taut Con , FO Con specific can be added Ana Con (encodes block world laws) Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  12. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proof in Fitch Converting previous proof into Fitch: 1. RightOf(b,c) 2. LeftOf(d,e) 3. b = d 4. LeftOf(c,b) from 1, since LeftOf and RightOf are inverses 5. LeftOf(c,d) from 4 and 3, using identity elimination 6. LeftOf(c,e) from 5 and 2, since LeftOf is transitive Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  13. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proof in Fitch Converting previous proof into Fitch: 1. RightOf(b,c) 2. LeftOf(d,e) 3. b = d 4. LeftOf(c,b) Ana Con : 1 5. LeftOf(c,d) from 4 and 3, using identity elimination 6. LeftOf(c,e) from 5 and 2, since LeftOf is transitive Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  14. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proof in Fitch Converting previous proof into Fitch: 1. RightOf(b,c) 2. LeftOf(d,e) 3. b = d 4. LeftOf(c,b) Ana Con : 1 5. LeftOf(c,d) = Elim : 4, 3 6. LeftOf(c,e) from 5 and 2, since LeftOf is transitive Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  15. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Proof in Fitch Converting previous proof into Fitch: 1. RightOf(b,c) 2. LeftOf(d,e) 3. b = d 4. LeftOf(c,b) Ana Con : 1 5. LeftOf(c,d) = Elim : 4, 3 6. LeftOf(c,e) Ana Con : 5, 2 Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  16. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Limitations on Fitch ◮ Fitch is tuned for Tarski’s World, with Ana Con modeling the laws of the block world ◮ Fitch is not tuned for arithmetic. Thus Fitch cannot handle the proof that x · x > x + x Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  17. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Limitations on Fitch ◮ Fitch is tuned for Tarski’s World, with Ana Con modeling the laws of the block world ◮ Fitch is not tuned for arithmetic. Thus Fitch cannot handle the proof that x · x > x + x ◮ Ana Con is very strong, so do not use it for exercises, unless explicitly allowed (neither use Taut Con or FO Con ) The Grade Grinder will report unauthorized use of Ana Con ! Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  18. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Limitations on Fitch ◮ Fitch is tuned for Tarski’s World, with Ana Con modeling the laws of the block world ◮ Fitch is not tuned for arithmetic. Thus Fitch cannot handle the proof that x · x > x + x ◮ Ana Con is very strong, so do not use it for exercises, unless explicitly allowed (neither use Taut Con or FO Con ) The Grade Grinder will report unauthorized use of Ana Con ! ◮ System F is not tuned for Tarski’s world, and therefore has no special proof rules for the predicates there, like LeftOf ◮ But since the identity relation “=” is used in all domains of discourse, system F has special rules for that predicate Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  19. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Identity Introduction (= Intro) Rule described p.55 is amazingly simple: t = t ⊲ This says that the identity relation is reflexive. Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  20. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Properties of Identity Symmetry a = b b = a Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

  21. Outline Introduction Proving Validity: Examples The Notion of Proof Rules Proving Validity: More Examples Fitch Reasoning about Identity Properties of Identity Symmetry a = b b = a Transitivity a = b b = c a = c Torben Amtoft Kansas State University Proving the Validity of an Argument

Recommend

External Validity March 25 1 / 16 Definition How do we define external validity? Mundane

External Validity March 25 1 / 16 Definition How do we define external validity? Mundane

External Validity March 25 1 / 16 Definition How do we define external validity? Mundane realism (surface similarity) Generalizability of results 2 / 16 Discussion Experiments have strong internal validity. If that is why we do

552 views • 16 slides
ARGUMENT NOTES M R S . P E R RY E N G L I S H I ARGUMENT TERMS Claim: a statement that asserts

ARGUMENT NOTES M R S . P E R RY E N G L I S H I ARGUMENT TERMS Claim: a statement that asserts

ARGUMENT NOTES M R S . P E R RY E N G L I S H I ARGUMENT TERMS Claim: a statement that asserts a main point of an argument (a side) Example: T eaching is a great career. 1. Write your own example of a claim. ARGUMENT TERMS Reason(s): the

344 views • 17 slides
Cue validity Cue validity - predictiveness of a cue for a given category Central

Cue validity Cue validity - predictiveness of a cue for a given category Central

Cue validity Cue validity - predictiveness of a cue for a given category Central intuition: Some features are more strongly associated with a distinct category than others Paw - shared by many animals Mane - only a few

334 views • 29 slides
Schools, Skills, and Synapses James J. Heckman University of Chicago The Argument Argument

Schools, Skills, and Synapses James J. Heckman University of Chicago The Argument Argument

Schools, Skills, and Synapses James J. Heckman University of Chicago The Argument Argument Polarization Skills Abilities and Outcomes Explanations Critical and Sensitive Periods Circuits Summary The Argument Argument Many major

1.08k views • 80 slides
The 5 th Argument Mining Workshop The Argument Mining Community is Growing 90 80 82 70 60

The 5 th Argument Mining Workshop The Argument Mining Community is Growing 90 80 82 70 60

The 5 th Argument Mining Workshop The Argument Mining Community is Growing 90 80 82 70 60 59 50 51 40 30 35 20 10 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 "Argument(ation) Mining" Number of registered # of results in Google Scholar

315 views • 7 slides
The Kalam Cosmological Argument Cosmological Arguments A cosmological argument is one that

The Kalam Cosmological Argument Cosmological Arguments A cosmological argument is one that

The Kalam Cosmological Argument Cosmological Arguments A cosmological argument is one that argues that there must be a God to explain the existence of the universe. There are different forms of the argument depending on what is to be

486 views • 14 slides
1 The Problem of Truth Successful Argumentation: (Truth versus Persuasion) (cont d) The

1 The Problem of Truth Successful Argumentation: (Truth versus Persuasion) (cont d) The

Argument Not a fight or a debate The connotation that an argument is a heated disagreement does not apply here We are not concerned with formal pro-con debates where one position or another is argued. Argument An

162 views • 3 slides
The structure of the argument Evidence from Polish: Argument 1 Predication from within a PP and

The structure of the argument Evidence from Polish: Argument 1 Predication from within a PP and

The structure of the argument Evidence from Polish: Argument 1 Predication from within a PP and Case assignment with Numeral Phrases Certain raising verbs in Polish selects PPs whose predicate-phrasal Przepiorkowski (2000) daughters

413 views • 9 slides
SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC What is an argument? An argument is the public,

SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC What is an argument? An argument is the public,

SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC What is an argument? An argument is the public, linguistic expression of reasoning. An argument is (or could be rephrased as) a set of sentences consisting of one or more premises , which contain

670 views • 35 slides
End-to-End Argument Jeff Chase Duke University End-To-End Argument Application TCP Where to

End-to-End Argument Jeff Chase Duke University End-To-End Argument Application TCP Where to

End-to-End Argument Jeff Chase Duke University End-To-End Argument Application TCP Where to Place Functionality? IP Router End-to-End Argument Functionality should be implemented at a lower layer if and only if it can be

694 views • 12 slides
On Theorem Proving for Program Checking Historical perspective and recent developments Maria

On Theorem Proving for Program Checking Historical perspective and recent developments Maria

Outline Introduction Where is theorem proving in program checking Inside theorem proving Big and little engines together: a new theorem proving style Decision procedures with speculative inferences Current and future challenges On Theorem

944 views • 69 slides
Visual theorem proving with the Incredible Proof Machine The idea Theorem Proving without

Visual theorem proving with the Incredible Proof Machine The idea Theorem Proving without

Interactive Theorem Proving, Nancy August 22, 2016 Joachim Breitner Karlsruhe Institute of Technology University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Visual theorem proving with the Incredible Proof Machine The idea Theorem Proving without Syntax

579 views • 43 slides
Teaching Argument Blanqui Valledor SURN April 20, 2018 Introducing Argument Amys Murder

Teaching Argument Blanqui Valledor SURN April 20, 2018 Introducing Argument Amys Murder

Teaching Argument Blanqui Valledor SURN April 20, 2018 Introducing Argument Amys Murder Discussion Who Dunnit? Persuasion versus Argument Subtle, but Significant differences between.. The Goals: Persuasive Argumentative To

557 views • 33 slides
SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 5: TRUTH TABLES FOR TESTING VALIDITY SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 6: FURTHER

SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 5: TRUTH TABLES FOR TESTING VALIDITY SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 6: FURTHER

SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 5: TRUTH TABLES FOR TESTING VALIDITY SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 6: FURTHER APPLICATIONS OF THE TRUTH TABLE METHOD 4 Truth Table Skills: Testing whether an argument form is valid . (Equivalently: testing whether one or

321 views • 12 slides
Learning theorem proving through self-play Stanisaw Purga Overview AlphaZero Proving

Learning theorem proving through self-play Stanisaw Purga Overview AlphaZero Proving

Learning theorem proving through self-play Stanisaw Purga Overview AlphaZero Proving game adjusting MCTS for proving game some results 2019-10 1 Neural black box game state S move policy expected outcome R n v

455 views • 45 slides
First-Order Necessity and Validity First-Order Necessity and Validity Mark Criley IWU

First-Order Necessity and Validity First-Order Necessity and Validity Mark Criley IWU

First-Order Necessity and Validity First-Order Necessity and Validity Mark Criley IWU BackOf, Between, Small, etc. predicates other than =. necessity does. But FO-necessity pays attention to a little bit less than Logical

107 views • 9 slides
4.5: Proving the Correctness of Grammars In this section, we consider techniques for proving the

4.5: Proving the Correctness of Grammars In this section, we consider techniques for proving the

4.5: Proving the Correctness of Grammars In this section, we consider techniques for proving the correctness of grammars, i.e., for proving that grammars generate the languages we want them to. 1 / 21 Definition of Suppose G is a grammar and

324 views • 21 slides
Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving And

Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving And

Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving Groundwater Contamination Litigation: Proving And Defending Against Liability for Clean Up Costs Demonstrating Nexus, Causation and

940 views • 62 slides
Workshop Argument Strength Bochum, 2 December 2016 The importance of argument strength in

Workshop Argument Strength Bochum, 2 December 2016 The importance of argument strength in

Workshop Argument Strength Bochum, 2 December 2016 The importance of argument strength in policy-making: the case of European Union directives Corina Andone ( University of Amsterdam ) and Florin Coman-Kund ( Erasmus University Rotterdam )

407 views • 3 slides
Topic 29/9/20 L.O To write a balanced argument -I can think of valid reasons for my argument -I

Topic 29/9/20 L.O To write a balanced argument -I can think of valid reasons for my argument -I

Topic 29/9/20 L.O To write a balanced argument -I can think of valid reasons for my argument -I can think of opposing opinions Topic L.O To write a balanced argument 29/9/20 Starter Can you name 3 facts about Athens Topic L.O To write a

693 views • 12 slides
Circuit Validity Checker D. Mitch Bailey Shuhari System, Japan WOSET 2020 CVC: Circuit Validity

Circuit Validity Checker D. Mitch Bailey Shuhari System, Japan WOSET 2020 CVC: Circuit Validity

CVC Circuit Validity Checker D. Mitch Bailey Shuhari System, Japan WOSET 2020 CVC: Circuit Validity Checker What is it? A system to pinpoint reliability errors that can lead to device failures or unintended current leakage. Similar

746 views • 6 slides
Proving In fi nite Satis fi ability Peter Baumgartner Joshua Bax Goal Theorem Proving in

Proving In fi nite Satis fi ability Peter Baumgartner Joshua Bax Goal Theorem Proving in

Proving In fi nite Satis fi ability Peter Baumgartner Joshua Bax Goal Theorem Proving in Hierarchic Combinations of Speci fi cations Dis Background theory linear integer arithmetic Data structures ? Conjecture list axioms/arrays

443 views • 15 slides
Automated Theorem Proving 1/4: Introduction and Propositional Theorem Proving A.L. Lamprecht

Automated Theorem Proving 1/4: Introduction and Propositional Theorem Proving A.L. Lamprecht

Automated Theorem Proving 1/4: Introduction and Propositional Theorem Proving A.L. Lamprecht Course Program Semantics and Verfication 2020, Utrecht University September 21, 2020 Lecture Notes Automated Reasoning by Gerard A.W. Vreeswijk.

609 views • 40 slides
Argument Strength and Probability Henry Prakken Workshop on Argument Strength Bochum

Argument Strength and Probability Henry Prakken Workshop on Argument Strength Bochum

Argument Strength and Probability Henry Prakken Workshop on Argument Strength Bochum 30-11-2016 Argumentation and Probability Theory Argumentation-as-inference is a form of nonmonotonic logic Qualitative approaches to reasoning with

574 views • 40 slides

More recommend