Cuts, consistency statements and interpretations

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 423-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel Pudlák
Keyword(s):  
Crucial Role ◽  
Initial Segment ◽  
Free Variable ◽  
Finite Part ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Successor Function ◽  
Recursively Enumerable

Interpretability in reflexive theories, especially in PA, has been studied in many papers; see e.g. [3], [6], [7], [10], [11], [15], [26]. It has been shown that reflexive theories exhibit many nice properties, e.g. (1) if T, S are recursively enumerable reflexive, then T is interpretable in S iff every Π1 sentence provable in T is provable in S; and (2) if S is reflexive, T is recursively enumerable and locally interpretable in S (i.e. every finite part of T is interpretable in S), then T is globally interpretable in S (Orey's theorem, cf. [3]).In this paper we want to study such statements for nonreflexive theories, especially for finitely axiomatizable theories (which are never reflexive). These theories behave differently, although they may be quite close to reflexive theories, as e.g. GB to ZF. An important fact is that in such theories one can define proper cuts. By a cut we mean a formula with one free variable which defines a nonempty initial segment of natural numbers closed under the successor function. The importance of cuts for interpretations in GB was realized already by Vopěnka and Hájek in [30]. Pioneering work was done by Solovay in [24]. There he developed the method of “shortening of cuts”. Using this method it is possible to replace any cut by a cut which is contained in it and has some desirable additional properties; in particular it can be closed under + and ·. This introduces ambiguity in the concept of arithmetic in theories which admit proper cuts, namely, which cut (closed under + and ·) should be called the arithmetic of the theory? Cuts played the crucial role also in [20].

α-degrees of α-theories

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Metakides
Keyword(s):  
Initial Segment ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Infinite Length ◽  
Infinitary Logic ◽  
Admissible Set ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Limit Ordinal ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Further Development

Let α be a limit ordinal with the property that any “recursive” function whose domain is a proper initial segment of α has its range bounded by α. α is then called admissible (in a sense to be made precise later) and a recursion theory can be developed on it (α-recursion theory) by providing the generalized notions of α-recursively enumerable, α-recursive and α-finite. Takeuti [12] was the first to study recursive functions of ordinals, the subject owing its further development to Kripke [7], Platek [8], Kreisel [6], and Sacks [9].Infinitary logic on the other hand (i.e., the study of languages which allow expressions of infinite length) was quite extensively studied by Scott [11], Tarski, Kreisel, Karp [5] and others. Kreisel suggested in the late '50's that these languages (even which allows countable expressions but only finite quantification) were too large and that one should only allow expressions which are, in some generalized sense, finite. This made the application of generalized recursion theory to the logic of infinitary languages appear natural. In 1967 Barwise [1] was the first to present a complete formalization of the restriction of to an admissible fragment (A a countable admissible set) and to prove that completeness and compactness hold for it. [2] is an excellent reference for a detailed exposition of admissible languages.

An α-finite injury method of the unbounded type

1976 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
C. T. Chong
Keyword(s):  
Fine Structure ◽  
Initial Segment ◽  
Fundamental Importance ◽  
Upper Semilattice ◽  
The Past ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Background Material ◽  
A Priority ◽  
Admissible Ordinals ◽  
Priority Argument

Let α be an admissible ordinal. In this paper we study the structure of the upper semilattice of α-recursively enumerable degrees. Various results about the structure which are of fundamental importance had been obtained during the past two years (Sacks-Simpson [7], Lerman [4], Shore [9]). In particular, the method of finite priority argument of Friedberg and Muchnik was successfully generalized in [7] to an α-finite priority argument to give a solution of Post's problem for all admissible ordinals. We refer the reader to [7] for background material, and we also follow closely the notations used there.Whereas [7] and [4] study priority arguments in which the number of injuries inflicted on a proper initial segment of requirements can be effectively bounded (Lemma 2.3 of [7]), we tackle here priority arguments in which no such bounds exist. To this end, we focus our attention on the fine structure of Lα, much in the fashion of Jensen [2], and show that we can still use a priority argument on an indexing set of requirements just short enough to give us the necessary bounds we seek.

Partially ordered sets representable by recursively enumerable classes

1969 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-12
Author(s):  
J. B. Florence
Keyword(s):  
Partially Ordered Sets ◽  
Ordered Sets ◽  
Inclusion Relation ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Partially Ordered ◽  
Recursively Enumerable

A partially ordered (p.o.) set (P, ≼) is represented by the recursively enumerable (r.e.) class C if (P, ≼) is order isomorphic to (C, ⊆), that is to the p.o. set consisting of C ordered by the inclusion relation. (P, ≼.) is representable if it is represented by some r.e. class. N will denote the set of natural numbers.

Applications of Strict Π11 predicates to infinitary logic

1969 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 409-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Barwise
Keyword(s):  
Normal Form ◽  
Infinitary Logic ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Image Position

Consider the predicate of natural numbers defined by: where R is recursive. If, as usual, the variable ƒ ranges over ωω (the set of functions from natural numbers to natural numbers) then this is just the usual normal form for Π11 sets. If, however, ƒ ranges over 2ω (the set of functions from ω into {0, 1}) then every such predicate is recursively enumerable.3 Thus the second type of formula is generally ignored. However, the reduction just mentioned requires proof, and the proof uses some form of the Brower-König Infinity Lemma.

A generalization of the concept of ω-consistency

1954 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Henkin
Keyword(s):  
Functional Calculus ◽  
Free Variable ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Deductive Systems ◽  
Individual Variable ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Formal Properties ◽  
Use Of Models

In this paper we consider certain formal properties of deductive systems which, in special cases, reduce to the property of ω-consistency; and we then seek to understand the significance of these properties by relating them to the use of models in providing interpretations of the deductive systems.The notion of ω-consistency arises in connection with deductive systems of arithmetic. For definiteness, let us suppose that the system is a functional calculus whose domain of individuals is construed as the set of natural numbers, and that the system possesses individual constants ν0, ν1, ν2, … such that νi functions as a name for the number i. Such a system is called ω-consistent, if there is no well-formed formula A(x) (in which x is the only free variable) such that A(ν0), A(ν1), A(ν2), … and ∼(x)A(x) are all formal theorems of the system, where A(νi) is the formula resulting from A(x) by substituting the constant νi for each free occurrence of the individual variable x.Now consider an arbitrary applied functional calculus F, and let Γ be any non-empty set of its individual constants. In imitation of the definition of ω-consistency, we may say that the system F is Γ-consistent, if it contains no formula A(x) (in which x is the only free variable) such that ⊦ A (α) for every constant α in Γ, and also ⊦ ∼(x)A(x) (where an occurrence of “⊦” indicates that the formula which it precedes is a formal theorem). We easily see that the condition of Γ-consistency is equivalent to the condition that the system F contain no formula B(x) such that ⊦ ∼ B(α) for each α in Γ, and also ⊦ (∃x)B(x).

On r.e. and co-r.e. vector spaces with nonextendible bases

1980 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Remmel
Keyword(s):  
Vector Space ◽  
Quotient Space ◽  
Independent Set ◽  
Effective Procedure ◽  
Vector Spaces ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Infinite Dimensional ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Vector Addition ◽  
Zero Vector

The concern of this paper is with recursively enumerable and co-recursively enumerable subspaces of a recursively presented vector spaceV∞ over a (finite or infinite) recursive field F which is defined in [6] to consist of a recursive subset U of the natural numbers N and operations of vector addition and scalar multiplication which are partial recursive and under which V∞ becomes a vector space. Throughout this paper, we will identify V∞ with N, say via some fixed Gödel numbering, and assume V∞ is infinite dimensional and has a dependence algorithm, i.e., there is a uniform effective procedure which determines whether or not any given n-tuple v0, …, vn−1 from V∞ is linearly dependent. Various properties of V∞ and its sub-spaces have been studied by Dekker [1], Guhl [3], Metakides and Nerode [6], Kalantari and Retzlaff [4], and the author [7].Given a subspace W of V∞, we say W is r.e. (co-r.e.) if W(V∞ − W) is an r.e. subset of N and write dim(V) for the dimension of V. Given subspaces V, W of V∞, V + W will denote the weak sum of V and W and if V ⋂ M = {0} (where 0 is the zero vector of V∞), we write V ⊕ Winstead of V + W. If W ⊇ V, we write Wmod V for the quotient space. An independent set A ⊆ V∞ is extendible if there is an r.e. independent set I ⊇ A such that I − A is infinite and A is nonextendible if it is not the case An is extendible. A r.e. subspace M ⊇ V∞ is maximal if dim(V∞ mod M) = ∞ and for any r.e. subspace W ⊇ Meither dim(W mod M) < ∞ or dim(V∞ mod W) < ∞.

scholarly journals Recursive equivalence types of vector spaces

1974 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 376-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Vector Space ◽  
Vector Spaces ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Infinite Dimensional ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Countably Infinite

We consider subspaces of a vector space UF, which is countably infinite dimensional over a recursively enumerable field F with recursive operations, where the operations in UF are also recursive, and where, of course, F and UF are sets of natural numbers. It is the object of this paper to investigate recursive equivalence types of such vector spaces and the ways in which their properties are analogous to and depend on properties of recursive equivalence types of sets.

Decidability and undecidability of theories with a predicate for the primes

1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 672-687 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. T. Bateman ◽  
C. G. Jockusch ◽  
A. R. Woods
Keyword(s):  
General Result ◽  
Order Theory ◽  
Second Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Linear Case ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Successor Function ◽  
First Order ◽  
First Order Theory

AbstractIt is shown, assuming the linear case of Schinzel's Hypothesis, that the first-order theory of the structure 〈ω; +, P〉, where P is the set of primes, is undecidable and, in fact, that multiplication of natural numbers is first-order definable in this structure. In the other direction, it is shown, from the same hypothesis, that the monadic second-order theory of 〈ω S, P〉 is decidable, where S is the successor function. The latter result is proved using a general result of A. L. Semënov on decidability of monadic theories, and a proof of Semënov's result is presented.

An introduction to hyperarithmetical functions

1967 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Functional Equation ◽  
Functional Equations ◽  
Systems Of Equations ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Successor Function ◽  
Finite Systems ◽  
Identity Function ◽  
Zero Function

By functional equation we mean an equation of the form(1) A1 … Aκ = B1 … B1.Here the A's and B's are functions of one variable from and to the natural numbers and FG is the function obtained from F and G by composition, i.e. FG(x) = F(G(x)) for all natural numbers x. We wish to investigate finite systems of functional equations. Now if all the A's and B's of (1) are equal to the identity function I (or all equal to the zero function O), then the equation (1) is satisfied trivially. Thus, in order to make the problem of solvability of systems of equations interesting, we must have some function given which will be held fixed throughout. We take the successor function S to be this given function.

scholarly journals Random Orders and Gambler's Ruin

10.37236/1920 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Blass ◽  
Gábor Braun
Keyword(s):  
Random Process ◽  
Generating Function ◽  
Initial Segment ◽  
Linear Ordering ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Gambler’S Ruin ◽  
Biased Coin

We prove a conjecture of Droste and Kuske about the probability that $1$ is minimal in a certain random linear ordering of the set of natural numbers. We also prove generalizations, in two directions, of this conjecture: when we use a biased coin in the random process and when we begin the random process with a specified ordering of a finite initial segment of the natural numbers. Our proofs use a connection between the conjecture and a question about the game of gambler's ruin. We exhibit several different approaches (combinatorial, probabilistic, generating function) to the problem, of course ultimately producing equivalent results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document