View: session overviewtalk overviewside by side with other conferences

11:00 | Position Paper: Mathematical Logic through Python PRESENTER: Noam Nisan ABSTRACT. We briefly motivate and describe our new book, "Mathematical Logic through Python", which is forthcoming (2022) in Cambridge University Press. |

12:00 | Whom to teach logic? ABSTRACT. The purpose of the workshop is to discuss whether and how we should teach logic to computer science students. However, the perspectives of teaching logic to ``pure math'' students are also not brilliant. In both cases mandatory courses vanish from the curriculum, and non-mandatory courses attract not so many students. So I change the focus a little bit: what audience should we teach logic? My answer is that we should mix interested math and CS students, and teach those who need logic together. Another question is when to teach logic. I will argue that different parts of logic must be taught in different parts of the curriculum. |

Lunches will be held in Taub hall and in The Grand Water Research Institute.

14:00 | ABSTRACT. Logic lies at the heart of computing, but its presence is somewhat dimming. This is particularly striking at the undergraduate level, where far too little logic training is done. This paper examines this regrettable state of affairs, considering what is actually taught, what should be taught, and how logic must be taught at computing undergraduates. |

15:00 | Introducing Logic by Stealth to Computer Science Students PRESENTER: Liam O'Reilly ABSTRACT. Logic is an inevitable part of any undergraduate computer science degree programme. However, today's computer science student typically finds this to be at best a necessary evil with which they struggle to engage. Twenty years ago, we started to address this issue seriously in our university, and we have instituted a number of innovations throughout the years which have had a positive effect on engagement and, thus, attainment. |

17:30 | The Herbrand Manifesto: Thinking Inside the Box PRESENTER: Vinay Chaudhri ABSTRACT. The traditional semantics for relational logic (sometimes called Tarskian semantics) is based on the notion of interpretations of constants in terms of objects external to the logic. Herbrand semantics is an alternative that is based on truth assignments for ground sentences without reference to external objects. Herbrand semantics is simpler and more intuitive than Tarskian semantics; and, consequently, it is easier to teach and learn. Moreover, it is stronger than Tarskian semantics. For example, while it is not possible to finitely axiomatize integer arithmetic with Tarskian semantics, this can be done easily with Herbrand semantics. The downside is a loss of some common logical properties, such as compactness and inferential completeness. However, there is no loss of inferential power - anything that can be deduced according to Tarskian semantics can also be deduced according to Herbrand semantics. Based on these results, we argue that there is value in using Herbrand semantics for relational logic in place of Tarskian semantics. It alleviates many of the current problems with relational logic and ultimately may foster a wider use of relational logic in human reasoning and computer applications. |

18:30 | Teaching logic to CS undergraduates PRESENTER: Thomas Zeume ABSTRACT. In this position paper we (1) provide context on how logic is (typically) anchored in CS curricula of German universities, (2) describe an introductory level logic course for CS students taught at TU Dortmund and Ruhr University Bochum designed to appeal to a broad spectrum of CS students, (3) report on experiences in establishing this course as a compulsory module in the CS Bachelor curriculum at Ruhr University Bochum. Additionally we (4) sketch a vision for leveraging modern technology in logic instruction. |