2026-08-28·by Sijie Wang#idea#math

decidability

Decidable, semi-decidable, undecidable

Parent: logic

The vocabulary for "can an algorithm settle this?"

The three levels

A set / predicate S (say of natural numbers, or strings) is:

  • decidable (recursive) — some algorithm halts on every input and answers "x ∈ S?" yes/no;
  • semi-decidable (recursively enumerable, r.e.) — some algorithm halts and says yes exactly on members, and may run forever on non-members;
  • undecidable — not decidable.
The bridge

S is decidable ⟺ both S and its complement are semi-decidable. (Run both semi-deciders in parallel; one must halt. Conversely a decider semi-decides both sides.)

So undecidability is a one-sidedness: the halting-problem is semi-decidable (wait and see it halt) but not co-semi-decidable (you can't confirm non-halting) — hence undecidable. Almost every "does program P have semantic property Q?" is undecidable by Rice's theorem, and new undecidable problems are minted by reduction from halting (generalized-collatz, FOL validity, Post correspondence…).

This is the property behind the r.e. tier, the reason you relax to get usable answers, and the exact ceiling on "does this agent/loop terminate?" (recursion-is-a-phase-transition).

about this entry

One of sijie's wiki entries. The AI on this site is grounded in the same corpus and answers in sijie's voice, with citations back to entries like this one — answering costs sijie money, so it waits behind a code: enter an access code →