An axiomatic system for the first order language with an equi-cardinality quantifier

1966 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitsuru Yasuhara
Keyword(s):  
Rational Numbers ◽  
Axiomatic System ◽  
Universal Quantifier ◽  
Real Numbers ◽  
Relational System ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Relational Systems ◽  
Finite Domains ◽  
The Universe

The equi-cardinality quantifier1 to be used in this article, written as Qx, is characterised by the following semantical rule: A formula QxA(x) is true in a relational system exactly when the cardinality of the set consisting of these elements which make A(x) true is the same as that of the universe. For instance, QxN(x) is true in 〈Rt, N〉 but false in 〈Rl, N〉 where Rt, Rl, and N are the sets of rational numbers, real numbers, and natural numbers, respectively. We notice that in finite domains the equi-cardinality quantifier is the same as the universal quantifier. For this reason, all relational systems considered in the following are assumed infinite.

Almost strongly minimal theories. I

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
Algebraic Closure ◽  
Natural Extension ◽  
Stone Space ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Simple Class ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Natural Expansion ◽  
Minimal Formula

In [1] the notions of strongly minimal formula and algebraic closure were applied to the study of ℵ1-categorical theories. In this paper we study a particularly simple class of ℵ1-categorical theories. We characterize this class in terms of the analysis of the Stone space of models of T given by Morley [3].We assume familiarity with [1] and [3], but for convenience we list the principal results and definitions from those papers which are used here. Our notation is the same as in [1] with the following exceptions.We deal with a countable first order language L. We may extend the language L in several ways. If is an L-structure, there is a natural extension of L obtained by adjoining to L a constant a for each (the universe of ). For each sentence A(a1, …, an) ∈ L(A) we say satisfies A(a1, …, an) and write if in Shoenfield's notation If is an L-structure and X is a subset of , then L(X) is the language obtained by adjoining to L a name x for each is the natural expansion of to an L(X)-structure. A structure is an inessential expansion [4, p. 141] of an L-structure if for some .

Noninitial segments of the α-degrees

1973 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 368-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Macintyre
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Lattice ◽  
Initial Segment ◽  
Elementary Theory ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Partial Ordering ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Suitable Notion ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Degrees Of Unsolvability

Let α be an admissible ordinal and let L be the first order language with equality and a single binary relation ≤. The elementary theory of the α-degrees is the set of all sentences of L which are true in the universe of the α-degrees when ≤ is interpreted as the partial ordering of the α-degrees. Lachlan [6] showed that the elementary theory of the ω-degrees is nonaxiomatizable by proving that any countable distributive lattice with greatest and least members can be imbedded as an initial segment of the degrees of unsolvability. This paper deals with the extension of these results to α-recursion theory for an arbitrary countable admissible α > ω. Given α, we construct a set A with α-degree a such that every countable distributive lattice with greatest and least member is order isomorphic to a segment of α-degrees {d ∣ a ≤αd≤αb} for some α-degree b. As in [6] this implies that the elementary theory of the α-degrees is nonaxiomatizable and hence undecidable.A is constructed in §2. A is a set of integers which is generic with respect to a suitable notion of forcing. Additional applications of such sets are summarized at the end of the section. In §3 we define the notion of a tree and construct a particular tree T0 which is weakly α-recursive in A. Using T0 we can apply the techniques of [6] and [2] to α-recursion theory. In §4 we reduce our main results to three technical lemmas concerning systems of trees. These lemmas are proved in §5.

An interpretation of “finite” modal first-order languages in classical second-order languages

1976 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 337-340
Author(s):  
Scott K. Lehmann
Keyword(s):  
Possible Worlds ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Universal Quantifier ◽  
Possible World ◽  
Simple Interpretation ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
Modal Semantics ◽  
Individual Variables

This note describes a simple interpretation * of modal first-order languages K with but finitely many predicates in derived classical second-order languages L(K) such that if Γ is a set of K-formulae, Γ is satisfiable (according to Kripke's 55 semantics) iff Γ* is satisfiable (according to standard (or nonstandard) second-order semantics).The motivation for the interpretation is roughly as follows. Consider the “true” modal semantics, in which the relative possibility relation is universal. Here the necessity operator can be considered a universal quantifier over possible worlds. A possible world itself can be identified with an assignment of extensions to the predicates and of a range to the quantifiers; if the quantifiers are first relativized to an existence predicate, a possible world becomes simply an assignment of extensions to the predicates. Thus the necessity operator can be taken to be a universal quantifier over a class of assignments of extensions to the predicates. So if these predicates are regarded as naming functions from extensions to extensions, the necessity operator can be taken as a string of universal quantifiers over extensions.The alphabet of a “finite” modal first-order language K shall consist of a non-empty countable set Var of individual variables, a nonempty finite set Pred of predicates, the logical symbols ‘¬’ ‘∧’, and ‘∧’, and the operator ‘◊’. The formation rules of K generate the usual Polish notations as K-formulae. ‘ν’, ‘ν1’, … range over Var, ‘P’ over Pred, ‘A’ over K-formulae, and ‘Γ’ over sets of K-formulae.

On spectra, and the negative solution of the decision problem for identities having a finite nontrivial model

1975 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Mckenzie
Keyword(s):  
Model Problem ◽  
Recursive Algorithm ◽  
Finite Model ◽  
Positive Direction ◽  
First Order ◽  
Sharp Form ◽  
Universal Sentence ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
The Universe

An algorithm has been described by S. Burris [3] which decides if a finite set of identities, whose function symbols are of rank at most 1, has a finite, nontrivial model. (By “nontrivial” it is meant that the universe of the model has at least two elements.) As a consequence of some results announced in the abstracts [2] and [8], it is clear that if the restriction on the ranks of function symbols is relaxed somewhat, then this finite model problem is no longer solvable by an algorithm, or at least not by a “recursive algorithm” as the term is used today.In this paper we prove a sharp form of this negative result; showing, by the way, that Burris' result is in a sense the best possible result in the positive direction. Our main result is that in a first order language whose only function or relation symbol is a 2-place function symbol (the language of groupoids), the set of identities that have no nontrivial model, is recursively inseparable from the set of identities such that the sentence has a finite model. As a corollary, we have that each of the following problems, restricted to sentences defined in the language of groupoids, is algorithmically unsolvable: (1) to decide if an identity has a finite nontrivial model; (2) to decide if an identity has a nontrivial model; (3) to decide if a universal sentence has a finite model; (4) to decide if a universal sentence has a model. We note that the undecidability of (2) was proved earlier by McNulty [13, Theorem 3.6(i)], improving results obtained by Murskiǐ [14] and by Perkins [17]. The other parts of the corollary seem to be new.

Products of two-sorted structures

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Olin
Keyword(s):  
Finite Number ◽  
Direct Product ◽  
Direct Products ◽  
Direct Sums ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Universal Equivalence ◽  
Relational Systems ◽  
Multiple Operation ◽  
Definition Of

First order properties of direct products and direct sums (weak direct products) of relational systems have been studied extensively. For example, in Feferman and Vaught [3] an effective procedure is given for reducing such properties of the product to properties of the factors, and thus in particular elementary equivalence is preserved. We consider here two-sorted relational systems, with the direct product and sum operations keeping one of the sorts stationary. (See Feferman [4] for a similar definition of extensions.)These considerations are motivated by the example of direct products and sums of modules [8], [9]. In [9] examples are given to show that the direct product of two modules (even having only a finite number of module elements) does not preserve two-sorted (even universal) equivalence for any finite or infinitary language Lκ, λ. So we restrict attention here to direct powers and multiples (many copies of one structure). Also in [9] it is shown (for modules, but the proofs generalize immediately to two-sorted structures with a finite number of relations) that the direct multiple operation preserves first order ∀E-equivalence and the direct power operation preserves first order ∀-equivalence. We show here that these results for general two-sorted structures in a finite first order language are, in a sense, best-possible. Examples are given to show that does not imply , and that does not imply .

A Note on the Realization of Types

1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-98
Author(s):  
Alan Adamson
Keyword(s):  
Complete Theory ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
The Universe

Let L be a countable first-order language and T a fixed complete theory in L. If is a model of T, is an n-sequence of variables, and ā=〈a1,…, an〉 is an n-sequence of elements of M, the universe of , we let where ranges over formulas of L containing freely at most the variables υ1,…υn. ā is said to realize in We let be where is the sequence of the first n variables of L.

A form of feasible interpolation for constant depth Frege systems

2010 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 774-784 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Krajíček
Keyword(s):  
Constant Depth ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Frege Systems ◽  
Image Position ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Dnf Formula

AbstractLet L be a first-order language and Φ and Ψ two L-sentences that cannot be satisfied simultaneously in any finite L-structure. Then obviously the following principle ChainL,Φ,Ψ(n, m) holds: For any chain of finite L-structures C1, …, Cm with the universe [n] one of the following conditions must fail:For each fixed L and parameters n, m the principle ChainL,Φ,Ψ(n,m) can be encoded into a propositional DNF formula of size polynomial in n, m.For any language L containing only constants and unary predicates we show that there is a constant CL such that the following holds: If a constant depth Frege system in DeMorgan language proves ChainL,Φ,Ψ(n, cL . n) by a size s proof then the class of finite L-structures with universe [n] satisfying Φ can be separated from the class of those L-structures on [n] satisfying ψ by a depth 3 formula of size 2log(S)O(1) and with bottom fan-in log(S)O(1).

scholarly journals On evaluations of propositional formulas in countable structures

Filomat ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Perovic ◽  
Dragan Doder ◽  
Zoran Ognjanovic ◽  
Miodrag Raskovic
Keyword(s):  
Propositional Logic ◽  
Rational Numbers ◽  
Infinite Subset ◽  
Inference Rules ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Finite Sequences

Let L be a countable first-order language such that its set of constant symbols Const(L) is countable. We provide a complete infinitary propositional logic (formulas remain finite sequences of symbols, but we use inference rules with countably many premises) for description of C-valued L-structures, where C is an infinite subset of Const(L). The purpose of such a formalism is to provide a general propositional framework for reasoning about F-valued evaluations of propositional formulas, where F is a C-valued L-structure. The prime examples of F are the field of rational numbers Q, its countable elementary extensions, its real and algebraic closures, the field of fractions Q(?), where ? is a positive infinitesimal and so on.

Stratification and cut-elimination

1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 213-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel Crabbé
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Type Theory ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Simple Type ◽  
First Order ◽  
Similar Reason ◽  
Separation Axioms ◽  
Simple Type Theory ◽  
Order Language ◽  
The Universe

In this paper, we show the normalization of proofs of NF (Quine's New Foundations; see [15]) minus extensionality. This system, called SF (Stratified Foundations) differs in many respects from the associated system of simple type theory. It is written in a first order language and not in a multi-sorted one, and the formulas need not be stratifiable, except in the instances of the comprehension scheme. There is a universal set, but, for a similar reason as in type theory, the paradoxical sets cannot be formed.It is not immediately apparent, however, that SF is essentially richer than type theory. But it follows from Specker's celebrated result (see [16] and [4]) that the stratifiable formula (extensionality → the universe is not well-orderable) is a theorem of SF.It is known (see [11]) that this set theory is consistent, though the consistency of NF is still an open problem.The connections between consistency and cut-elimination are rather loose. Cut-elimination generally implies consistency. But the converse is not true. In the case of set theory, for example, ZF-like systems, though consistent, cannot be freed of cuts because the separation axioms allow the formation of sets from unstratifiable formulas. There are nevertheless interesting partial results obtained when restrictions are imposed on the removable cuts (see [1] and [9]). The systems with stratifiable comprehension are the only known set-theoretic systems that enjoy full cut-elimination.

scholarly journals A remark on infinitary languages

1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 461-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörg Flum
Keyword(s):  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
The Universe

In his paper [1] Chang provides among other things answers to questions of the following type: Given two models and of powers α and β, respectively, what is the least λ such that implies His proofs are by induction on the quantifier rank of formulas and they use an idea which in the case of ordinary first-order language goes back to Ehrenfeucht and Fraïssé. But, as we show, one can easily prove that if λ is big compared with κ and with the cardinality of the universe of the structure , then every L∞κ-formula is equivalent modulo the set of all Lλκ-sentences which hold in to a Lλκ-formula. From this, Chang's results follow immediately. The same method can be applied to similar problems concerning generalized languages.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document