Abstract

ABSTRACT The Gödel–Dummett logic and Łukasiewicz one are two main many-valued logics used by the fuzzy logic community. Our goal is a quantitative comparison of these two. In this paper, we will mostly consider the 3-valued Gödel–Dummett logic as well as the 3-valued Łukasiewicz one. We shall concentrate on their implicational-negation fragments which are limited to formulas formed with a fixed finite number of variables. First, we investigate the proportion of the number of true formulas of a certain length n to the number of all formulas of such length built with exactly one variable. Then, we investigate such proportion for satisfiable formulas. Second, we generalise our investigation on formulas written with $ k\ge 1 $ k ≥ 1 variables. The primary goal of the paper is the research on the asymptotic behaviour of these fractions when the length n tends to infinity. If such limits exists, they are real numbers between 0 and 1, which are called the density of truth or the density of SAT. To compare the density of truth and the density of satisfiable formulas for both fragments of 3-valued Gödel–Dummett's and Łukasiewicz's logics we use the powerful theory of analytic combinatorics. This paper is a natural continuation of the previous brief conference note by Kostrzycka and Zaionc (2020) as well as enriched with some previous results from Kostrzycka and Zaionc (2003). In the conference note we computed analytically the density of truth and the density of SAT (with a determined precision) for 3-valued Łukasiewicz's logic restricted to a language with only one variable. In Kostrzycka and Zaionc (2003) we computed the same values for exactly the same fragment of the 3-valued Gödel–Dummett logic. This paper answers the more general questions of the existence of density of truth and density of SAT for both many-valued logics with an arbitrary finite number of variables. Therefore this paper gives an an interesting picture of two main families of finite-valued fuzzy logics problems treated quantitatively. This picture is taken from the perspective of classical logic. It shows that unexpectedly there is quantitatively a little distance between these two approaches.