Ɛ-terms, introduced by David Hilbert [8], have the form Ɛx.Φ, where x is a variable and Φ is a formula. Their syntactical structure is thus similar to that of a quantified formulae, but they are terms, denoting 'an element for which Φ holds, if there is any'.
The topic of this paper is an investigation into the possibilities and limits of using Ɛ-terms for automated theorem proving. We discuss the relationship between Ɛ-terms and Skolem terms (which both can be used alternatively for the purpose of ∃-quantifier elimination), in particular with respect to efficiency and intuition. We also discuss the consequences of allowing Ɛ-terms in theorems (and cuts). This leads to a distinction between (essentially two) semantics and corresponding calculi, one enabling efficient automated proof search, and the other one requiring human guidance but enabling a very intuitive (i.e. semantic) treatment of Ɛ-terms. We give a theoretical foundation of the usage of both variants in a single framework. Finally, we argue that these two approaches to Ɛ are just the extremes of a range of Ɛ-treatments, corresponding to a range of different possible Skolemization variants.
[1]
Christian G. Fermüller,et al.
Non-elementary Speedups between Different Versions of Tableaux
,
1995,
TABLEAUX.
[2]
Melvin Fitting,et al.
First-Order Logic and Automated Theorem Proving
,
1990,
Graduate Texts in Computer Science.
[3]
R. Smullyan.
First-Order Logic
,
1968
.
[4]
Bernhard Beckert,et al.
The Even More Liberalized delta-Rule in Free Variable Semantic Tableaux
,
1993,
Kurt Gödel Colloquium.
[5]
A. Leisenring.
Mathematical logic and Hilbert's ε-symbol
,
1971
.
[6]
Domenico Cantone,et al.
A Further and Effective Liberalization of the delta-Rule in Free Variable Semantic Tableaux
,
1998,
FTP.