← Return to results

Quantifiers and explicit domains

On this page
  1. Mathematical statement
  2. Representative formula (exact TeX)
  3. Assumptions
  4. Symbol scope
  5. Intuition, definition, and misconceptions
  6. Adopted derivation guide
  7. Prerequisites
  8. Verification boundary
  9. Next obligation
  10. Same-source structured data

This English edition is an AI candidate and does not yet have an OCME Atlas (GPT-6) Twin closure receipt.

Universal and existential quantifiers must bind a domain. Under classical truth semantics, a universal statement over the empty domain is true and an existential statement is false.

mko-quantifier · definition · v0.10.0

Mathematical statement

For an explicit domain U and predicate P, ∀x∈U P(x) states that every element of U satisfies P, while ∃x∈U P(x) states that at least one element of U satisfies P. Under classical truth semantics, ¬∀x∈U P(x) is equivalent to ∃x∈U ¬P(x), and ¬∃x∈U P(x) is equivalent to ∀x∈U ¬P(x).

Representative formula (exact TeX)

P(x)

Assumptions

  • The domain U and the semantics of P are explicit; this pulse uses classical truth semantics.
  • The exercises use explicit finite integer domains and decidable predicates. Exhaustive enumeration establishes results only on the specified finite domain.

Symbol scope

  • P — predicate with specified semantics; the truth of P(x) depends on the input
  • x — predicate input; quantifier binding is stated in the complete statement

Intuition, definition, and misconceptions

A universal statement requires every permitted element to pass; an existential statement requires one permitted witness. Quantifier order and domain are part of the statement and cannot be freely exchanged or omitted.

For U=∅, no counterexample can violate the universal statement, so it is true; no witness can satisfy the existential statement, so it is false. Negating a quantifier both exchanges universal and existential quantification and negates the predicate.

The exercises enumerate all integer elements of a finite U and check order, equality, or divisibility by a nonzero divisor exactly. Results do not extend to all integers, all reals, or an infinite domain, and no formal proof of first-order logical completeness is claimed.

Common errors include treating a few passing instances as a proof of an infinite universal claim, or reading the negation of a universal statement as failure at every element.

Adopted derivation guide

Quantifiers and explicit domains: deciding universal and existential statements and their negations on a finite integer domain

The original MKO is retained. The guide has its own append-only revision and verification boundaries, not a new Lean proof.

Prerequisites

  • Proposition — Quantification forms a closed statement; finite decidable instances can be checked element by element.
  • Set — A set specifies the restricted domain of a quantifier.

Verification boundary

Finite decidable truth values can be recomputed exhaustively; the general quantifier-inference and classical-logic formal bridge has no attached Evidence.

not_formalized

This does not mean the content is false; it means no replayable computational or formal evidence is registered yet.

Next obligation

Bind Forall, Exists, restricted quantifiers, classical negation laws, and empty-domain cases.

Same-source structured data

This page and the interactive view use the same object and existing language edition; this adds no proof or human review.

Canonical MKO JSON · Plain Markdown