adj ·Rare ·Advanced level
This entry combines structured lexical data with WordToolSet review checks. Definitions, examples, synonyms, and usage notes may come from different source tables, so the page is designed to show evidence from more than one angle before you rely on "undecidable" in a final draft.
If a word has several senses, prefer the sense that matches your sentence's grammar and surrounding context. A correct definition can still be the wrong choice when the sentence needs a different register, emphasis, or level of specificity.
Read the first definition as a starting point, then check the example, synonyms, and part of speech before treating "undecidable" as the right word for your sentence.
If your draft is formal, technical, persuasive, or sensitive, compare "undecidable" with a nearby alternative so the final choice matches both meaning and reader expectation.
Check whether "undecidable" is acting as adj in your sentence. A definition is only useful when the grammar matches the way the word is being used.
Compare it with "incomputable" and other nearby choices to see whether the sentence needs a softer, stronger, or more familiar word.
Use the example sentence below as an evidence check, then read your own sentence out loud to catch tone or rhythm problems.
Review note: Definition pages are checked for source coverage, sentence evidence, synonym support, and editorial insight before they are treated as approval-ready pages. If the evidence is too thin, the page remains available to users but is kept out of the approval-facing indexed inventory.
Before publishing a sentence with "undecidable", ask whether the word helps the reader understand the idea faster. A precise word should reduce confusion, not simply make the sentence look more polished.
When the definition, synonym evidence, and example context point in the same direction, the word is usually a safer choice. When they conflict, revise the sentence or choose a clearer alternative.
"The first-order procedure SP differs from the proposi- tional procedure CP°₁ in an essential feature. Namely, CP°₁ always terminates while SP may run forever as we have seen with the example immediately after (3.7). This is not a specific defect of SP. Rather it is known that first-order logic is an undecidable theory while propositional logic is a decidable theory. This means that for the latter there are decision pro- cedures which for any formula decide whether it is valid or not — and CP°₁ in fact is such a decision procedure — while for the former such decision procedures do not exist in princi- ple. Thus SP, according to these results for which the reader is referred to any logic texts such as [End], [DrG] or [Lew], is of the kind which we may expect, it is a semi-decision procedure which confirms if a formula is valid but may run forever for invalid formulas. Therefore, termination by running out of time or space after any finite number of steps will leave the question for the validity of a formula unsettled. [...]"
"The first-order procedure SP differs from the proposi- tional procedure CP°₁ in an essential feature. Namely, CP°₁ always terminates while SP may run forever as we have seen with the example immediately after (3.7). This is not a specific defect of SP. Rather it is known that first-order logic is an undecidable theory while propositional logic is a decidable theory. This means that for the latter there are decision pro- cedures which for any formula decide whether it is valid or not — and CP°₁ in fact is such a decision procedure — while for the former such decision procedures do not exist in princi- ple. Thus SP, according to these results for which the reader is referred to any logic texts such as [End], [DrG] or [Lew], is of the kind which we may expect, it is a semi-decision procedure which confirms if a formula is valid but may run forever for invalid formulas. Therefore, termination by running out of time or space after any finite number of steps will leave the question for the validity of a formula unsettled. [...]"
Incapable of being algorithmically decided in finite time. For example, a set of strings is undecidable if it is impossible to program a computer (even one with infinite memory) to determine whether or not specified strings are included.
Common synonyms include: incomputable, indeterminable, indeterminate, insolvable, irresolvable, more ambiguous.
The first-order procedure SP differs from the proposi- tional procedure CP°₁ in an essential feature. Namely, CP°₁ always terminates while SP may run forever as we have seen with the example immediately after (3.7). This is not a specific defect of SP. Rather it is known that first-order logic is an undecidable theory while propositional logic is a decidable theory. This means that for the latter there are decision pro- cedures which for any formula decide whether it is valid or not — and CP°₁ in fact is such a decision procedure — while for the former such decision procedures do not exist in princi- ple. Thus SP, according to these results for which the reader is referred to any logic texts such as [End], [DrG] or [Lew], is of the kind which we may expect, it is a semi-decision procedure which confirms if a formula is valid but may run forever for invalid formulas. Therefore, termination by running out of time or space after any finite number of steps will leave the question for the validity of a formula unsettled. [...]
From un- + decidable.