binary relation symbol
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

12
(FIVE YEARS 0)

H-INDEX

6
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hajnal Andréka ◽  
István Németi ◽  
Tarek Sayed Ahmed

AbstractWe give a novel application of algebraic logic to first order logic. A new, flexible construction is presented for representable but not completely representable atomic relation and cylindric algebras of dimension n (for finite n > 2) with the additional property that they are one-generated and the set of all n by n atomic matrices forms a cylindric basis. We use this construction to show that the classical Henkin-Orey omitting types theorem fails for the finite variable fragments of first order logic as long as the number of variables available is > 2 and we have a binary relation symbol in our language. We also prove a stronger result to the effect that there is no finite upper bound for the extra variables needed in the witness formulas. This result further emphasizes the ongoing interplay between algebraic logic and first order logic.


2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Fischer ◽  
J. A. Makowsky

Abstract.We show that the spectrum of a sentence ϕ in Counting Monadic Second Order Logic (CMSOL) using one binary relation symbol and finitely many unary relation symbols, is ultimately periodic, provided all the models of ϕ are of clique width at most k, for some fixed k. We prove a similar statement for arbitrary finite relational vocabularies τ and a variant of clique width for τ-structures. This includes the cases where the models of ϕ are of tree width at most k. For the case of bounded tree-width, the ultimate periodicity is even proved for Guarded Second Order Logic GSOL. We also generalize this result to many-sorted spectra, which can be viewed as an analogue of Parikh's Theorem on context-free languages, and its analogues for context-free graph grammars due to Habel and Courcelle.Our work was inspired by Gurevich and Shelah (2003), who showed ultimate periodicity of the spectrum for sentences of Monadic Second Order Logic where only finitely many unary predicates and one unary function are allowed. This restriction implies that the models are all of tree width at most 2, and hence it follows from our result.


2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 348-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Hirsch ◽  
Ian Hodkinson ◽  
Roger D. Maddux

AbstractFor every finite n ≥ 4 there is a logically valid sentence φn with the following properties: φn contains only 3 variables (each of which occurs many times); φn contains exactly one nonlogical binary relation symbol (no function symbols, no constants, and no equality symbol); φn has a proof in first-order logic with equality that contains exactly n variables, but no proof containing only n − 1 variables. This result was first proved using the machinery of algebraic logic developed in several research monographs and papers. Here we replicate the result and its proof entirely within the realm of (elementary) first-order binary predicate logic with equality. We need the usual syntax, axioms, and rules of inference to show that φn has a proof with only n variables. To show that φn has no proof with only n − 1 variables we use alternative semantics in place of the usual, standard, set-theoretical semantics of first-order logic.


2002 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Hirsch ◽  
Ian Hodkinson ◽  
Roger D. Maddux

AbstractWe confirm a conjecture, about neat embeddings of cylindric algebras, made in 1969 by J. D. Monk, and a later conjecture by Maddux about relation algebras obtained from cylindric algebras. These results in algebraic logic have the following consequence for predicate logic: for every finite cardinal α ≥ 3 there is a logically valid sentence X, in a first-order language ℒ with equality and exactly one nonlogical binary relation symbol E, such that X contains only 3 variables (each of which may occur arbitrarily many times), X has a proof containing exactly α + 1 variables, but X has no proof containing only α variables. This solves a problem posed by Tarski and Givant in 1987.


2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 1530-1555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart Kuijpers ◽  
Jan Paredaens ◽  
Jan Van den Bussche

AbstractWe investigate topological properties of subsets S of the real plane, expressed by first-order logic sentences in the language of the reals augmented with a binary relation symbol for S. Two sets are called topologically elementary equivalent if they have the same such first-order topological properties. The contribution of this paper is a natural and effective characterization of topological elementary equivalence of closed semi-algebraic sets.


1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paweł Pazdyka

The problem of coding relations by means of a single binary relation is well known in the mathematical literature. It was considered in interpretation theory, and also in connection with investigations of decidability of elementary theories. Using various constructions (see, e.g., [2,6], proofs of Theorem 11 in [7] and Theorem 16.51 in [3]), for any model for a countable language, one can construct a model for ℒp (a language with a single binary relation symbol ) in which is interpretable. Each of the mentioned constructions has the same weak point: the universe of is different than the universe of . In [4] we have shown that, in the infinite case, one can eliminate this defect, i.e., for any infinite , we have constructed a model , having the same universe as , in which is elementarily definable. In all constructions mentioned above, it appears that formulas, which define in ( in ), are very complicated. In the present paper, another construction of a model for ℒp is given.


1990 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juha Oikkonen

AbstractC. Karp has shown that if α is an ordinal with ωα = α and A is a linear ordering with a smallest element, then α and α ⊗ A are equivalent in L∞ω up to quantifer rank α. This result can be expressed in terms of Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games where player ∀ has to make additional moves by choosing elements of a descending sequence in α. Our aim in this paper is to prove a similar result for Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games of length ω1. One implication of such a result will be that a certain infinite quantifier language cannot say that a linear ordering has no descending ω1-sequences (when the alphabet contains only one binary relation symbol). Connected work is done by Hyttinen and Oikkonen in [H] and [O].


1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Ambos-Spies ◽  
M. Lerman

The classification of algebraic structures which can be embedded into ℛ, the uppersemilattice of recursively enumerable degrees, is the key to answering certain questions about Th(ℛ), the elementary theory of ℛ. In particular, these classification problems are important for answering decidability questions about fragments of Th(ℛ). Thus the solutions of Fried berg [F] and Mučnik [M] to Post's problem were easily extended to show that all finite partially ordered sets are embeddable into ℛ, and hence that ∃1 ∩ Th(ℛ), the existential theory of ℛ, is decidable. (The language used is ℒ′, the pure predicate calculus together with a binary relation symbol ≤ to be interpreted as the ordering of ℛ) The problem of determining which finite lattices are embeddable into ℛ has been a long-standing open problem, and is one of the major obstacles to determining whether ∀2 ∩ Th(ℛ), the universal-existential theory of ℛ, is decidable. Shore has obtained some nice partial results in this direction. Embeddings also played a central role in showing that Th(ℛ) is not ℵ0-categorical (Lerman, Shore and Soare [LeShSo]), thus resolving a problem posed by Jockusch. Harrington and Shelah [HS] embedded all 0′-presentable partially ordered sets into ℛ in such a way that the partially ordered sets can be uniformly recovered from four parameters. They used these embeddings to show that Th(ℛ) is undecidable.The first nontrivial extension of the embeddings of Friedberg and Mučnik to lattice embeddings was obtained independently by Lachlan [La1] and Yates [Y] who showed that the four-element Boolean algebra can be embedded into ℛ. Thomason [T] and Lerman independently extended this result to include all finite distributive lattices. The nondistributive case, however, was much more difficult. Lachlan [La2] embedded the two five-element nondistributive lattices M5 and N5 (see Figures 1 and 2) into ℛ, and his proof could easily have been extended to include a larger class of lattices.


1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Marker

Let L be a first order language containing a binary relation symbol <.Definition. Suppose ℳ is an L-structure and < is a total ordering of the domain of ℳ. ℳ is ordered minimal (-minimal) if and only if any parametrically definable X ⊆ ℳ can be represented as a finite union of points and intervals with endpoints in ℳ.In any ordered structure every finite union of points and intervals is definable. Thus the -minimal structures are the ones with no unnecessary definable sets. If T is a complete L-theory we say that T is strongly (-minimal if and only if every model of T is -minimal.The theory of real closed fields is the canonical example of a strongly -minimal theory. Strongly -minimal theories were introduced (in a less general guise which we discuss in §6) by van den Dries in [1]. Extending van den Dries' work, Pillay and Steinhorn (see [3], [4] and [2]) developed an extensive structure theory for definable sets in strongly -minimal theories, generalizing the results for real closed fields. They also established several striking analogies between strongly -minimal theories and ω-stable theories (most notably the existence and uniqueness of prime models). In this paper we will examine the construction of models of strongly -minimal theories emphasizing the problems involved in realizing and omitting types. Among other things we will prove that the Hanf number for omitting types for a strongly -minimal theory T is at most (2∣T∣)+, and characterize the strongly -minimal theories with models order isomorphic to (R, <).


1980 ◽  
Vol 77 ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuichi Komori

The first order language ℒ that we consider has two nullary function symbols 0, 1, a unary function symbol –, a binary function symbol +, a unary relation symbol 0 <, and the binary relation symbol = (equality). Let ℒ′ be the language obtained from ℒ, by adding, for each integer n > 0, the unary relation symbol n| (read “n divides”).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document