An axiomatization of the logic with the rough quantifier

1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 608-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Krynicki ◽  
Hans-Peter Tuschik
Keyword(s):  
Equivalence Relation ◽  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Order Structure ◽  
Partition Model ◽  
Weak Model ◽  
First Order ◽  
Basic Properties ◽  
Generalized Quantifier ◽  
Order Language ◽  
The Right

We consider the language L(Q), where L is a countable first-order language and Q is an additional generalized quantifier. A weak model for L(Q) is a pair 〈, q〉 where is a first-order structure for L and q is a family of subsets of its universe. In case that q is the set of classes of some equivalence relation the weak model 〈, q〉 is called a partition model. The interpretation of Q in partition models was studied by Szczerba [3], who was inspired by Pawlak's paper [2]. The corresponding set of tautologies in L(Q) is called rough logic. In the following we will give a set of axioms of rough logic and prove its completeness. Rough logic is designed for creating partition models.The partition models are the weak models arising from equivalence relations. For the basic properties of the logic of weak models the reader is referred to Keisler's paper [1]. In a weak model 〈, q〉 the formulas of L(Q) are interpreted as usual with the additional clause for the quantifier Q: 〈, q〉 ⊨ Qx φ(x) iff there is some X ∊ q such that 〈, q〉 ⊨ φ(a) for all a ∊ X.In case X satisfies the right side of the above equivalence we say that X is contained in φ(x) or, equivalently, φ(x) contains X.

Some remarks on definable equivalence relations in O-minimal structures

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 709-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anand Pillay
Keyword(s):  
Equivalence Relation ◽  
Linear Order ◽  
Finite Union ◽  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Complete Theory ◽  
First Order ◽  
Definable Set ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Minimal Structure ◽  
Definable Sets

Let M be an O-minimal structure. We use our understanding, acquired in [KPS], of the structure of definable sets of n-tuples in M, to study definable (in M) equivalence relations on Mn. In particular, we show that if E is an A-definable equivalence relation on Mn (A ⊂ M) then E has only finitely many classes with nonempty interior in Mn, each such class being moreover also A-definable. As a consequence, we are able to give some conditions under which an O-minimal theory T eliminates imaginaries (in the sense of Poizat [P]).If L is a first order language and M an L-structure, then by a definable set in M, we mean something of the form X ⊂ Mn, n ≥ 1, where X = {(a1…,an) ∈ Mn: M ⊨ϕ(ā)} for some formula ∈ L(M). (Here L(M) means L together with names for the elements of M.) If the parameters from come from a subset A of M, we say that X is A-definable.M is said to be O-minimal if M = (M, <,…), where < is a dense linear order with no first or last element, and every definable set X ⊂ M is a finite union of points, and intervals (a, b) (where a, b ∈ M ∪ {± ∞}). (This notion is as in [PS] except here we demand the underlying order be dense.) The complete theory T is said to be O-minimal if every model of T is O-minimal. (Note that in [KPS] it is proved that if M is O-minimal, then T = Th(M) is O-minimal.) In the remainder of this section and in §2, M will denote a fixed but arbitrary O-minimal structure. A,B,C,… will denote subsets of M.

Introduction and Overview

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Tennant
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Method ◽  
Proof Theory ◽  
Valid Argument ◽  
First Order ◽  
Proof Systems ◽  
Formal Systems ◽  
Deductive Logic ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Foundational Work ◽  
The Right

This is a foundational work, written not just for philosophers of logic, but for logicians and foundationalists generally. Like Frege we seek to deal with the formal first-order language of mathematics. We revisit Gentzen’s proof theory in order to build relevance into proofs, while leaving intact all the logical power one is entitled to expect of a deductive logic for mathematics and for scientific method generally. Proof systems are constituted by particular choices of rules of inference. We raise the issue of the reflexive stability of any argument for a particular choice of logic as the ‘right’ logic. We examine the question of pluralism v. absolutism in choice of logic, and suggest that the informal notion of valid argument is stable and robust enough for us to be able to ‘get it right’ with our formal systems of proof for both constructive and non-constructive reasoning.

scholarly journals On Equivalence Relations Between Interpreted Languages, with an Application to Modal and First-Order Language

Erkenntnis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai F. Wehmeier
Keyword(s):  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Modal Operator ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Bona Fide

AbstractI examine notions of equivalence between logics (understood as languages interpreted model-theoretically) and develop two new ones that invoke not only the algebraic but also the string-theoretic structure of the underlying language. As an application, I show how to construe modal operator languages as what might be called typographical notational variants of bona fide first-order languages.

Definable equivalence relations on algebraically closed fields

1989 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 928-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lou van den Dries ◽  
David Marker ◽  
Gary Martin
Keyword(s):  
Equivalence Relation ◽  
Analogous Result ◽  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Complex Numbers ◽  
Closed Field ◽  
Closed Fields ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
The Right ◽  
Algebraically Closed Fields ◽  
Special Case

This article was inspired by the question: is there a definable equivalence relation on the field of complex numbers, each of whose equivalence classes has exactly two elements? The answer turned out to be no, as we now explain in greater detail.Let Κ be an algebraically closed field and let E be a definable equivalence relation on Κ. [Note: By “definable” we will always mean “definable with parameters”.] Either E has one cofinite class, or all classes are finite and there is a number d such that all but a finite set of classes have cardinality d. In the latter case let B be the finite set of elements of Κ which are not in a class of size d. We prove the following result.Theorem 1. a) If char(Κ) = 0 or char(Κ) = p > d, then ∣B∣ ≡ 1 (mod d).b) If char(Κ) = 2 and d = 2, then ∣B∣ ≡ 0 (mod 2).c) If char(Κ) = p > 2 and d = p + s, where 1 ≤ s ≤ p/2, then ∣B∣ ≡ p + 1 (mod d).Furthermore, a)−c) are the only restrictions on ≡B≡.If one is in the right mood, one can view this theorem as saying that the “algebraic cardinality” of the complex numbers is congruent to 1 (mod n) for every n.§1 contains a reduction of the problem to the special case where E is induced by a rational function in one variable. §2 contains the main calculations and the proofs of a)−c). §3 contains eight families of examples showing that all else is possible. In §4 we prove an analogous result for real closed fields.

Fundamental relations and identities of fuzzy hyperalgebras

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Narjes Firouzkouhi ◽  
Abbas Amini ◽  
Chun Cheng ◽  
Mehdi Soleymani ◽  
Bijan Davvaz
Keyword(s):  
Universal Algebra ◽  
Equivalence Relation ◽  
Polynomial Function ◽  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Fundamental Relation ◽  
Term Function ◽  
Biological Phenomena ◽  
Definition Of

Inspired by fuzzy hyperalgebras and fuzzy polynomial function (term function), some homomorphism properties of fundamental relation on fuzzy hyperalgebras are conveyed. The obtained relations of fuzzy hyperalgebra are utilized for certain applications, i.e., biological phenomena and genetics along with some elucidatory examples presenting various aspects of fuzzy hyperalgebras. Then, by considering the definition of identities (weak and strong) as a class of fuzzy polynomial function, the smallest equivalence relation (fundamental relation) is obtained which is an important tool for fuzzy hyperalgebraic systems. Through the characterization of these equivalence relations of a fuzzy hyperalgebra, we assign the smallest equivalence relation α i 1 i 2 ∗ on a fuzzy hyperalgebra via identities where the factor hyperalgebra is a universal algebra. We extend and improve the identities on fuzzy hyperalgebras and characterize the smallest equivalence relation α J ∗ on the set of strong identities.

Weakly atomic-compact relational structures

1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Fuhrken ◽  
W. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Abelian Group ◽  
Model Theory ◽  
Compact Abelian Group ◽  
Finite Subset ◽  
Relational Structure ◽  
Similarity Type ◽  
First Order ◽  
Relational Structures ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Weakly Atomic

A relational structure is called weakly atomic-compact if and only if every set Σ of atomic formulas (taken from the first-order language of the similarity type of augmented by a possibly uncountable set of additional variables as “unknowns”) is satisfiable in whenever every finite subset of Σ is so satisfiable. This notion (as well as some related ones which will be mentioned in §4) was introduced by J. Mycielski as a generalization to model theory of I. Kaplansky's notion of an algebraically compact Abelian group (cf. [5], [7], [1], [8]).

scholarly journals The absorption theorem for affable equivalence relations

2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 1509-1531 ◽  
Author(s):  
THIERRY GIORDANO ◽  
HIROKI MATUI ◽  
IAN F. PUTNAM ◽  
CHRISTIAN F. SKAU
Keyword(s):  
Dynamical Systems ◽  
Equivalence Relation ◽  
Closed Subset ◽  
Cantor Set ◽  
Equivalence Relations ◽  
Orbit Structure ◽  
Orbit Equivalent ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
Significant Generalization

AbstractWe prove a result about extension of a minimal AF-equivalence relation R on the Cantor set X, the extension being ‘small’ in the sense that we modify R on a thin closed subset Y of X. We show that the resulting extended equivalence relation S is orbit equivalent to the original R, and so, in particular, S is affable. Even in the simplest case—when Y is a finite set—this result is highly non-trivial. The result itself—called the absorption theorem—is a powerful and crucial tool for the study of the orbit structure of minimal ℤn-actions on the Cantor set, see Remark 4.8. The absorption theorem is a significant generalization of the main theorem proved in Giordano et al [Affable equivalence relations and orbit structure of Cantor dynamical systems. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys.24 (2004), 441–475] . However, we shall need a few key results from the above paper in order to prove the absorption theorem.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document