A set theory with support for partial functions

Studia Logica 66 (1):59-78 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Partial functions can be easily represented in set theory as certain sets of ordered pairs. However, classical set theory provides no special machinery for reasoning about partial functions. For instance, there is no direct way of handling the application of a function to an argument outside its domain as in partial logic. There is also no utilization of lambda-notation and sorts or types as in type theory. This paper introduces a version of von-Neumann-Bernays-Gödel set theory for reasoning about sets, proper classes, and partial functions represented as classes of ordered pairs. The underlying logic of the system is a partial first-order logic, so class-valued terms may be nondenoting. Functions can be specified using lambda-notation, and reasoning about the application of functions to arguments is facilitated using sorts similar to those employed in the logic of the IMPS Interactive Mathematical Proof System. The set theory is intended to serve as a foundation for mechanized mathematics systems.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,438

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
66 (#242,923)

6 months
10 (#256,916)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joshua Guttman
Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Truth and singular terms.Tyler Burge - 1974 - Noûs 8 (4):309-325.
[Omnibus Review].Kenneth Kunen - 1969 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 34 (3):515-516.
Definedness.Solomon Feferman - 1995 - Erkenntnis 43 (3):295 - 320.
A relative consistency proof.Joseph R. Shoenfield - 1954 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 19 (1):21-28.
Non-standard models for formal logics.J. Barkley Rosser & Hao Wang - 1950 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 15 (2):113-129.

View all 9 references / Add more references