Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/0409142

Axiomatic Theory of Algorithms: Computability and Decidability in Algorithmic Classes

Mark Burgin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Axiomatic approach has demonstrated its power in mathematics. The main goal of this preprint is to show that axiomatic methods are also very efficient for computer science. It is possible to apply these methods to many problems in computer science. Here the main modes of computer functioning and program execution are described, formalized, and studied in an axiomatic context. The emphasis is on three principal modes: computation, decision, and acceptation. Now the prevalent mode for computers is computation. Problems of artificial intelligence involve decision mode, while communication functions of computer demand accepting mode. The main goal of this preprint is to study properties of these modes and relations between them. These problems are closely related to such fundamental concepts of computer science and technology as computability, decidability, and acceptability. In other words, we are concerned with the question what computers and software systems can do working in this or that mode. Consequently, results of this preprint allow one to achieve higher understanding of computations and in such a way, to find some basic properties of computers and their applications. Classes of algorithms, which model different kinds of computers and software, are compared with respect to their computing, accepting or deciding power. Operations with algorithms and machines are introduced. Examples show how to apply axiomatic results to different classes of algorithms and machines in order to enhance their performance.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Mark Burgin. 2004-09-08. Axiomatic Theory of Algorithms: Computability and Decidability in Algorithmic Classes. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0409142

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗