definición y significado de Entscheidungsproblem

In mathematics, the Entscheidungsproblem (pronounced [ɛntˈʃaɪdʊŋspʁoˌbleːm], German for 'decision problem') is a challenge posed by David Hilbert in 1928. The Entscheidungsproblem asks for an algorithm that takes as input a statement of a first-order logic (possibly with a finite number of axioms beyond the usual axioms of first-order logic) and answers "Yes" or "No" according to whether the statement is universally valid, i.e., valid in every structure satisfying the axioms. By the completeness theorem of first-order logic, a statement is universally valid if and only if it can be deduced from the axioms, so the Entscheidungsproblem can also be viewed as asking for an algorithm to decide whether a given statement is provable from the axioms using the rules of logic.

In 1936 and 1937, Alonzo Church and Alan Turing, respectively,^[1] published independent papers showing that a general solution to the Entscheidungsproblem is impossible. This result is now known as Church's Theorem or the Church–Turing Theorem (not to be confused with the Church–Turing thesis).

1 History of the problem
2 Negative answer
3 See also
4 Notes
5 References

History of the problem

The origin of the Entscheidungsproblem goes back to Gottfried Leibniz, who in the seventeenth century, after having constructed a successful mechanical calculating machine, dreamt of building a machine that could manipulate symbols in order to determine the truth values of mathematical statements.^[2] He realized that the first step would have to be a clean formal language, and much of his subsequent work was directed towards that goal. In 1928, David Hilbert and Wilhelm Ackermann posed the question in the form outlined above.

In continuation of his "program" with which he challenged the mathematics community in 1900, at a 1928 international conference David Hilbert asked three questions, the third of which became known as "Hilbert's Entscheidungsproblem".^[3] As late as 1930 he believed that there would be no such thing as an unsolvable problem.^[4]

Negative answer

Before the question could be answered, the notion of "algorithm" had to be formally defined. This was done by Alonzo Church in 1936 with the concept of "effective calculability" based on his λ calculus and by Alan Turing in the same year with his concept of Turing machines. It was recognized immediately by Turing that these are equivalent models of computation.

The negative answer to the Entscheidungsproblem was then given by Alonzo Church in 1935–36 and independently shortly thereafter by Alan Turing in 1936–37. Church proved that there is no computable function which decides for two given λ calculus expressions whether they are equivalent or not. He relied heavily on earlier work by Stephen Kleene. Turing reduced the halting problem for Turing machines to the Entscheidungsproblem. The work of both authors was heavily influenced by Kurt Gödel's earlier work on his incompleteness theorem, especially by the method of assigning numbers (a Gödel numbering) to logical formulas in order to reduce logic to arithmetic.

Turing's argument is as follows. Suppose that we had a general decision algorithm for statements in a first-order language. The question whether a given Turing machine halts or not can be formulated as a first-order statement, which would then be susceptible to the decision algorithm. But Turing had proven earlier that no general algorithm can decide whether a given Turing machine halts.

The Entscheidungsproblem is related to Hilbert's tenth problem, which asks for an algorithm to decide whether Diophantine equations have a solution. The non-existence of such an algorithm, established by Yuri Matiyasevich in 1970, also implies a negative answer to the Entscheidungsproblem.

Some first-order theories are algorithmically decidable; examples of this include Presburger arithmetic, real closed fields and static type systems of (most) programming languages. The general first-order theory of the natural numbers expressed in Peano's axioms cannot be decided with such an algorithm, however.

Notes

^ Church's paper was presented to the American Mathematical Society on 19 April 1935 and published on 15 April 1936. Turing, who had made substantial progress in writing up his own results, was disappointed to learn of Church's proof upon its publication (see correspondence between Max Newman and Church in Alonzo Church papers). Turing quickly completed his paper and rushed it to publication; it was received by the Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society on 28 May 1936, read on 12 November 1936, and published in January 1937 series 2, volume 42 (1936-1937); Turing added corrections in volume 43(1937) pp. 544-546. See Davis 1965:116.
^ Davis 2000: pp. 3–20
^ Hodges p. 91
^ Hodges p. 92, quoting from Hilbert

References

Alonzo Church, "An unsolvable problem of elementary number theory", American Journal of Mathematics, 58 (1936), pp 345–363
Alonzo Church, "A note on the Entscheidungsproblem", Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1 (1936), pp 40–41.
Martin Davis, 2000, Engines of Logic, W.W. Norton & Company, London, ISBN 0-393-32229-7 pbk.
Alan Turing, "On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, 42 (1937), pp 230–265. Online versions: from journal website, from Turing Digital Archive, from abelard.org. Errata appeared in Series 2, 43 (1937), pp 544–546.
Martin Davis, "The Undecidable, Basic Papers on Undecidable Propositions, Unsolvable Problems And Computable Functions", Raven Press, New York, 1965. Turing's paper is #3 in this volume. Papers include those by Godel, Church, Rosser, Kleene, and Post.
Andrew Hodges, Alan Turing: The Enigma, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1983. Alan M. Turing's biography. Cf Chapter "The Spirit of Truth" for a history leading to, and a discussion of, his proof.
Toulmin, Stephen, "Fall of a Genius", a book review of "Alan Turing: The Enigma by Andrew Hodges", in The New York Review of Books, January 19, 1984, p. 3ff.
Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell, Principia Mathematica to *56, Cambridge at the University Press, 1962. Re: the problem of paradoxes, the authors discuss the problem of a set not be an object in any of its "determining functions", in particular "Introduction, Chap. 1 p. 24 "...difficulties which arise in formal logic", and Chap. 2.I. "The Vicious-Circle Principle" p. 37ff, and Chap. 2.VIII. "The Contradictions" p. 60 ff.

Logic

Overview

Academic areas	Argumentation theory Axiology Critical thinking Computability theory Formal semantics History of logic Informal logic Logic in computer science Mathematical logic Mathematics Metalogic Metamathematics Model theory Philosophical logic Philosophy Philosophy of logic Philosophy of mathematics Proof theory Set theory

Foundational concepts	Abduction Analytic truth Antinomy A priori Deduction Definition Description Entailment Induction Inference Logical consequence Logical form Logical implication Logical truth Name Necessity Meaning Paradox Possible world Presupposition Probability Reason Reasoning Reference Semantics Statement Strict implication Substitution Syntax Truth Truth value Validity

Philosophical logic

Critical thinking and Informal logic	Analysis Ambiguity Argument Belief Bias Credibility Evidence Explanation Explanatory power Fact Fallacy Inquiry Opinion Parsimony Premise Propaganda Prudence Reasoning Relevance Rhetoric Rigor Vagueness

Theories of deduction	Constructivism Dialetheism Fictionalism Finitism Formalism Intuitionism Logical atomism Logicism Nominalism Platonic realism Pragmatism Realism

Metalogic and metamathematics

Cantor's theorem Church's theorem Church's thesis Consistency Effective method Foundations of mathematics Gödel's completeness theorem Gödel's incompleteness theorems Soundness Completeness Decidability Interpretation Löwenheim–Skolem theorem Metatheorem Satisfiability Independence Type–token distinction Use–mention distinction

Mathematical logic

General	Formal language Formation rule Formal system Deductive system Formal proof Formal semantics Well-formed formula Set Element Class Classical logic Axiom Natural deduction Rule of inference Relation Theorem Logical consequence Axiomatic system Type theory Symbol Syntax Theory

Traditional logic	Proposition Inference Argument Validity Cogency Syllogism Square of opposition Venn diagram

Propositional calculus and Boolean logic	Boolean functions Propositional calculus Propositional formula Logical connectives Truth tables

Predicate	First-order Quantifiers Predicate Second-order Monadic predicate calculus

Set theory	Set Empty set Enumeration Extensionality Finite set Function Subset Power set Countable set Recursive set Domain Range Ordered pair Uncountable set

Model theory	Model Interpretation Non-standard model Finite model theory Truth value Validity

Proof theory	Formal proof Deductive system Formal system Theorem Logical consequence Rule of inference Syntax

Computability theory	Recursion Recursive set Recursively enumerable set Decision problem Church–Turing thesis Computable function Primitive recursive function

Non-classical logic

Modal logic	Alethic Axiologic Deontic Doxastic Epistemic Temporal

Intuitionism	Intuitionistic logic Constructive analysis Heyting arithmetic Intuitionistic type theory Constructive set theory

Fuzzy logic	Degree of truth Fuzzy rule Fuzzy set Fuzzy finite element Fuzzy set operations

Substructural logic	Structural rule Relevance logic Linear logic

Paraconsistent logic	Dialetheism

Description logic	Ontology Ontology language

Logicians

Anderson Aristotle Averroes Avicenna Bain Barwise Bernays Boole Boolos Cantor Carnap Church Chrysippus Curry De Morgan Frege Geach Gentzen Gödel Hilbert Kleene Kripke Leibniz Löwenheim Peano Peirce Putnam Quine Russell Schröder Scotus Skolem Smullyan Tarski Turing Whitehead William of Ockham Wittgenstein Zermelo

Lists

Topics	Outline of logic Index of logic articles Mathematical logic Boolean algebra Set theory

Other	Logicians Rules of inference Paradoxes Fallacies Logic symbols

Definición y significado de Entscheidungsproblem

Definición

Entscheidungsproblem

Contents

History of the problem

Negative answer

See also

Notes

References