bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The consistency of classical set theory relative to a set theory with intu1tionistic logic
Authors: Friedman Harvey 
Published: May 2006

Let ZF be the usual Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory formulated without identity, and with the collection axiom scheme. Let ZF−-extensionality be obtained from ZF by using intuitionistic logic instead of classical logic, and dropping the axiom of extensionality. We give a syntactic transformation of ZF into ZF−-extensionality.Let CPC, HPC respectively be classical, intuitionistic predicate calculus without identity, whose only homological symbol is ∈. We use the ~ ~-translation, a basic tool in the metatheory of intuitionistic systems, which is defined byThe two fundamental lemmas about this ~ ~ -translation we will use areFor proofs, see Kleene [3, Lemma 43a, Theorem 60d].This - would provide the desired syntactic transformation at least for ZF into ZF− with extensionality, if A− were provable in ZF− for each axiom A of ZF. Unfortunately, the ~ ~-translations of extensionality and power set appear not to be provable in ZF−. We therefore form an auxiliary classical theory S which has no extensionality and has a weakened power set axiom, and show in §2 that the ~ ~-translation of each axiom of Sis provable in ZF−-extensionality. §1 is devoted to the translation of ZF in S.
An axiomatization for a class of two-cardinal models
Authors: Schmerl James H. 
Published: May 2006

In this note we give a simple recursive axiomatization for the class of structures of type (ℶω ℵ0). This solves a problem of Vaught which is Problem 13 in the book [1] of Chang and Keisler. The same technique is used to get a recursive axiomatization for the class of κ-like structures where κ is strongly ω-inaccessible.Let us fix throughout some recursive first-order language L, and until further notice let us suppose that included in L is a distinguished unary predicate symbol U. For cardinals κ and λ with κ ≥ λ ≥ ℵ0, we say the structure has type (κ, λ) if card(A)= κ and card . Let K(κ, λ) be the class of all structures of type (κ, λ). For each ordinal α define 2ακby 20κ = κ, and 2ακ= ⋃ {2λ: λ = 2βκ for some β < α} when α > 0. Let Vaught proved the following theorem in [7].Theorem (Vaught). Suppose a is a sentence such that for each n < ω there are κ, λ with κ > 2λn and a model of σ of type (κ, λ). Then whenever κ ≥ λ ≥ ℵ0, the sentence σ has a model of type (κ, λ).
Fragments of first order logic, I: universal Horn logic
Authors: McNulty George F. 
Published: May 2006

Let L be any finitary language. By restricting our attention to the universal Horn sentences of L and appealing to a semantical notion of logical consequence, we can formulate the universal Horn logic of L. The present paper provides some theorems about universal Horn logic that serve to distinguish it from the full first order predicate logic. Universal Horn equivalence between structures is characterized in two ways, one resembling Kochen's ultralimit theorem. A sharp version of Beth's definability theorem is established for universal Horn logic by means of a reduced product construction. The notion of a consistency property is relativized to universal Horn logic and the corresponding model existence theorem is proven. Using the model existence theorem another proof of the definability result is presented. The relativized consistency properties also suggest a syntactical notion of proof that lies entirely within the universal Horn logic. Finally, a decision problem in universal Horn logic is discussed. It is shown that the set of universal Horn sentences preserved under the formation of homomorphic images (or direct factors) is not recursive, provided the language has at least two unary function symbols or at least one function symbol of rank more than one.This paper begins with a discussion of how algebraic relations between structures can be used to obtain fragments of a given logic. Only two such fragments seem to be under current investigation: equational logic and universal Horn logic. Other fragments which seem interesting are pointed out.
A new look at the interpolation problem
Authors: Stern Jacques 
Published: May 2006

The original aim of this paper was to show that forcing provided a useful and unifying tool in the model theory of finite and admissible languages. Roughly speaking, any result obtained by a Henkin proof, by Makkai's method or by an omitting type argument can be given an alternative proof via forcing. Finally, instead of giving new proofs of a number of known theorems, we have chosen to focus on the interpolation theorem for many-sorted languages. The main result of this paper is thus a generalization of Feferman's theorems ([2], [3]) with a completely different proof; this was announced in [8] and [9].For more on forcing techniques in model theory the reader should consult [4] as well as [5]. He should also compare forcing and boolean-valued models developed in [6] for the classical case and in [7] for admissible languages. Throughout the paper familiarity with the standard concepts of model theory is assumed.The author wishes to express his gratitude to J. L. Krivine and K. McAloon for supervising his work. Thanks are also due to J. P. Ressayre for helpful suggestions and to R. L. Vaught for an interesting discussion on forcing in model theory. Finally, an interesting application has been pointed out by S. Feferman and has been included with his permission.
A large power set axiom
Authors: Cohen Paul E. 
Published: May 2006

Takeuti [6] has suggested the need for higher axioms for set theory which are analogous to higher axioms of infinity, but which claim that power sets are in some sense large. In this paper we investigate a reflection axiom of this sort (Axiom T).In §1, we introduce Axiom T and explore some related axioms. A technical lemma involving an elementary embedding is developed in §2 which allows us, in §3, to prove the relative consistency of Axiom T.The reader is assumed to be familiar with ramified forcing languages and the usual techniques of forcing. A suitable treatment of these subjects is given by Takeuti and Zaring [7].ZFC, GBC, ZF and GB are the set theories of Zermelo-Fraenkel and of Gödel-Bernays, with and without the axiom of choice (AC). CH is the continuum hypothesis.For α an ordinal, defineFor p1, p2 ∈ pα let p1 ≤ p2 mean that p1 ⊇ p2 (thus p1 is the stronger forcing condition). It is well known that Pα satisfies the countable chain condition [5].
A note on modal formulae and relational properties
Authors: van Benthem J. F. A. K. 
Published: May 2006

Consider modal propositional formulae, constructed using proposition-letters, connectives and the modal operators □ and ⋄. The semantic structures are frames, i.e., pairs <W, R> with R ⊆ W2. Let F, V be variables ranging respectively over frames and functions from the set of proposition-letters into the powerset of W. Then the relationmay be defined, for arbitrary formulae α, following the Kripke truth-definition. From this relation we may further defineNow, to every modal formula α there corresponds some property Pα of R. A particular example is obtained by considering the well-known translation of modal formulae into formulae of monadic second-order logic with a single binary first-order predicate. For these particular Pα we havefor all F and w ∈ W. These formulae Pα are, however, rather intractable and more convenient ones can often be found. An especially interesting case occurs when Pα may be taken to be some first-order formula. For example, it can be seen thatfor all F and w ∈ W. It is customary to talk about a related correspondence, namely when for all F we haveNote that this correspondence holds whenever the first one above holds.
Skolem functions and elementary embeddings
Authors: Knight Julia F. 
Published: May 2006

Let L be an elementary first order language. Let be an L-structure, and let φ be an L-formula with free variables u1, …, un, and υ. A Skolem function for φ on is an n-ary operation f on such that for all . If is an elementary substructure of , then an n-ary operation f on is said to preserve the elementary embedding of into if f(x)∈ for all x ∈ n, and (, f ∣n) ≺ (, f). Keisler asked the following question:Problem 1. If and are L-structures such that ≺ , and if φ (u, υ) is an L-formula (with appropriate free variables), must there be a Skolem function for φ on which preserves the elementary embedding?Payne [6] gave a counterexample in which the language L is uncountable. In [3], [5], the author announced the existence of an example in which L is countable but the structures and are uncountable. The construction of the example will be given in this paper. Keisler's problem is still open in case both the language and the structures are required to be countable. Positive results for some special cases are given in [4].The following variant of Keisler's question was brought to the author's attention by Peter Winkler:Problem 2. If L is a countable language, a countable L-structure, and φ(u, υ) an L-formula, must there be a Skolem function f for φ on such that for every countable elementary extension of , there is an extension of f which preserves the elementary embedding of into ?
Σ1 compactness for next admissible sets
Authors: Green Judy 
Published: May 2006

Let σ be any sequence B0, B1 …, Bn, … of transitive sets closed under pairs with for each n. In this paper we show that the smallest admissible set Aσ with σ ∈ Aσ is Σ1 compact. Thus we have an entirely new class of explicitly describable uncountable Σ1 compact sets.The search for uncountable Σ1 compact languages goes back to Hanf's negative results on compact cardinals [7]. Barwise first showed that all countable admissible sets were Σ1 compact [1] and then went on to give a characterization of the Σ1 compact sets in terms of strict reflection [2]. While his characterization has been of interest in understanding the Σ1 compactness phenomenon it has led to the identification of only one class of uncountable Σ1 compact sets. In particular, Barwise showed [2], using the above notation, that if ⋃nBn is power set admissible it satisfies the strict reflection principle and hence is Σ1 compact. (This result was obtained independently by Karp using algebraic methods [9].)In proving our compactness theorem we follow Makkai's approach to the Barwise Compactness Theorem [12] and use a modified version of Smullyan's abstract consistency property [14]. A direct generalization of Makkai's method to the cofinality ω case yields a proof of the Barwise-Karp result mentioned above [6]. In order to obtain our new result we depart from the usual definition of language and use instead the indexed languages of Karp [9] in which a conjunction is considered to operate on a function whose range is a set of formulas rather than on a set of formulas itself.
Turing machines and the spectra of first-order formulas
Authors: Jones Neil D. , Selman Alan L. 
Published: May 2006

H. Scholz [11] defined the spectrum of a formula φ of first-order logic with equality to be the set of all natural numbers n for which φ has a model of cardinality n. He then asked for a characterization of spectra. Only partial progress has been made. Computational aspects of this problem have been worked on by Gunter Asser [1], A. Mostowski [9], and J. H. Bennett [2]. It is known that spectra include the Grzegorczyk class and are properly included in . However, no progress has been made toward establishing whether spectra properly include , or whether spectra are closed under complementation.A possible connection with automata theory arises from the fact that contains just those sets which are accepted by deterministic linear-bounded Turing machines (Ritchie [10]). Another resemblance lies in the fact that the same two problems (closure under complement, and proper inclusion of ) have remained open for the class of context sensitive languages for several years.In this paper we show that these similarities are not accidental—that spectra and context sensitive languages are closely related, and that their open questions are merely special cases of a family of open questions which relate to the difference (if any) between deterministic and nondeterministic time or space bounded Turing machines.In particular we show that spectra are just those sets which are acceptable by nondeterministic Turing machines in time 2cx, where c is constant and x is the length of the input. Combining this result with results of Bennett [2], Ritchie [10], Kuroda [7], and Cook [3], we obtain the “hierarchy” of classes of sets shown in Figure 1. It is of interest to note that in all of these cases the amount of unrestricted read/write memory appears to be too small to allow diagonalization within the larger classes.
Minimum models of analysis
Authors: Shilleto J. R. 
Published: May 2006

Although there is no smallest ω model [6], Putnam and Gandy independently proved about 1963 that the class of ramified analytical sets, as defined by Cohen [3], form the smallest β model of analysis [2], [8]. This paper will consider other restricted classes of models, namely the βn models for integers n > 1 [10], and prove under appropriate assumptions the existence of minimum such models. In fact we shall construct the minimum βn model in a fashion similar to the procedure yielding the class of ramified analytical sets, but adding at each stage a segment of the sets in those already obtained (for n a fixed integer > 1).Roughly speaking a βn model is an ω model absolute for n-set-quantifier assertions about its subsets of natural numbers. A β model is simply a β1 model. See Enderton and Friedman [4] for a further investigation of βn models.
Countable homogeneous relational structures and ℵ0-categorical theories
Authors: Henson C. Ward 
Published: May 2006

A relational structure of cardinality ℵ0 is called homogeneous by Fraissé [1] if each isomorphism between finite substructures of can be extended to an automorphism of . In §1 of this paper it is shown that there are isomorphism types of such structures for the first order language L0 with a single (binary) relation symbol, answering a question raised by Fraissé. In fact, as is shown in §2, a family of nonisomorphic homogeneous structures for L0 can be constructed, each member of which satisfies the following conditions (where U is the homogeneous, ℵ0-universal graph, the structure of which is considered in [4]):(i) The relation R of is asymmetric (R ∩ R−1 = ∅);(ii) If A is the domain of and S is the symmetric relation R ∪ R−1, then (A, S) is isomorphic to U. That is, each may be regarded as the result of assigning a unique direction to each edge of the graph U.Let T0 be the first order theory of all homogeneous structures for L0 which have cardinality ℵ0. In §3 (which can be read independently of §2) it is shown that T0 has complete extensions (in L0), each of which is ℵ0-categorical. Moreover, among the complete extensions of T0 are theories of arbitrary (preassigned) degree of unsolvability. In particular, there exists an undecidable, ℵ0-categorieal theory in L0, which answers a question raised by Grzegorczyk [2], [3].It follows from Theorem 6 of [3] that there are ℵ0-categorical theories of partial orderings which have arbitrarily high degrees of unsolvability. This is in sharp contrast to the situation for linear orderings, which were the motivation for Fraissé's early work. Indeed, as is shown in [10], every ℵ0-categorical theory of a linear ordering is finitely axiomatizable. (W. Glassmire [12] has independently shown the existence of theories in L0 which are all ℵ0-categorical, and C. Ash [13] has independently shown that such theories exist with arbitrary degree of unsolvability.)
Decidability of the “almost all” theory of degrees
Authors: Stillwell John 
Published: May 2006

Ever since Spector's brilliant application of measure theory to recursion theory in 1958 [6] it has been realized that measure theory promotes sweeping simplifications in the theory of degrees. Results previously thought to be pathological were shown by Spector, and later Sacks [4], [5], to hold for almost all degrees (“almost all” in the sense of Lebesgue measure), often with much simpler proofs. Good examples of this phenomenon are Spector's demonstration that almost all pairs of sets are of incomparable degree (as an immediate consequence of Fubini's theorem) and Sacks' exquisitely simple deduction from this result that almost every degree is the join of two incomparable degrees (for if a random sequence is decomposed into its even and odd parts, the result is a random pair).The present paper attempts to vindicate the feeling that almost all degrees behave in a simple manner by showing that if the quantifier in the theory of degrees with ′(jump), ∪ (join) and ∩ (meet) is taken to be (almost ∀a) instead of (∀a) then the theory is decidable. We are able to use ∩ because it will be shown that if t1, t2 are any terms built from degree variables a1, …, am with ′ and ∪ then t1 ∩ t2 exists for almost all a1, …, am. Thus the “almost all” theory presents a sharp contrast to the standard theory, where ∩ is not always defined (Kleene-Post [1]) and which is known to be undecidable (Lachlan [2]).
Modal propositional logic on an orthomodular basis. I
Authors: Herman L. , Piziak R. 
Published: May 2006

A common method of obtaining the classical modal logics, for example the Feys system T, the Lewis systems, the Brouwerian system etc., is to build on a basis for the propositional calculus by adjoining a new symbol L, specifying new axioms involving L and the symbols in the basis for PC, and imposing one or more additional transformation rules. In the jargon of algebraic logic, which is the point of view we shall adopt, the “necessity” symbol L may be interpreted as an operator on the Boolean algebra of propositions of PC. For example, the Lewis system S4 may be regarded as a Boolean algebra ℒ together with an operator L on ℒ having the properties: (1)Lp ≤ p for all p in ℒ, (2)L1 = 1, (3) L(p → q) ≤ Lp → Lq for all p, q in ℒ, and (4) Lp = L(Lp) for all p in ℒ. Here, of course, → denotes the material implication connective: p→q = p′ ∨ q. It is easy to verify that property (3) may be replaced by either (3′) L(p ∧ q) = Lp ∧ Lq for all p, q in ℒ, or by (3″) L(p → q) ∧ Lp ≤ Lq for all p, q in ℒ. In particular, it follows from (1) through (4) above that L is a decreasing, idempotent and isotone operator on ℒ. Such mappings are often called interior operators.In a previous paper [5], we considered the problem of introducing an implication connective into a quantum logic. This is greatly complicated by the fact that the quantal propositions band together to form an orthocomplemented lattice which is only “locally” distributive. Such lattices are called orthomodular. For definitions and further discussion, the reader is referred to that paper. In it, we argued that the Sasaki implication connective ⊃ defined by p ⊃ q = p′ ∨ (p ∧ q) is a natural generalization of material implication when the lattice of propositions is ortho-modular. Indeed, if unrestricted distributivity were permitted, p ⊃ q would reduce to the classical material implication p → q. For this reason, we choose ⊃ to play the role of material implication in an orthomodular lattice. Further properties of ⊃ are enumerated in Example 2.2(1) and Corollary 2.4 below.
Almost local non-α-recursiveness
Authors: Chong Chi T. 
Published: May 2006

§1. Let α be an admissible ordinal which is also a limit of admissible ordinals (e.g. take any α such that α = α*, its projectum [5]). For any admissible γ ≦ α, let [γ) denote the initial segment of ordinals less than γ. A very general question that one might ask is the following: What conditions should one put on γ so that a certain statement true in Lα is ‘reflected’ to be true in Lγ? We cite some examples: (a) If β < γ < α, then Lα ⊨ “β cardinal” is ‘reflected’ to Lγ ⊨ “ β cardinal” (⊨ is just the satisfaction relation). (b) If β < γ < α and γ is a cardinal in Lα (called α-cardinal for short), then Lα ⊨ “β is not a cardinal” is ‘reflected’ to Lγ ⊨ “β is not a cardinal” This fact is used in Gödel's proof that V = L implies the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis. Our objective in this paper is to study a ‘reflection’ property of the following sort: Let A ⊆ [α) be an α-recursively enumerable (α-r.e.), non-α-recursive set. Under what conditions will A restricted to a smaller admissible ordinal γ be γ-r.e. and not γ-recursive?The notations used here are standard. Those that are not explained are adopted from the paper of Sacks and Simpson [5], to which we also refer the reader for background material.
A simplification of combinatory logic
Authors: Goodman Nicolas D. 
Published: May 2006

The usual formulations of combinatory logic, as in Church [1] or Curry and Feys [2], have no straightforward semantics. This lack complicates the proofs of basic metasystematic results, prevents the perspicuous formalization of combinatory logic as a deductive theory, and makes the combinators unnecessarily difficult to apply to recursion theory or to the foundations of mathematics. In the present paper we shall give a new formulation of combinatory logic, thought of as an abstract theory of rules. At each stage in the development we shall give a precise semantic interpretation for our axioms. We begin with an abstract treatment of the syntax and semantics of a theory of rules. We then specialize to the theory of the combinators and prove a completeness theorem connecting our axioms with our semantics. On this basis we treat functional abstraction, truth-functions, and the representation of partial recursive functions. In the spirit of Church [1, pp. 62–71], we conclude by extending our methods to the treatment of intensional identity.The theories developed here are part of a simplification of the theory of constructions described in [3]. Their semantics are motivated by the intended interpretation of the theory of constructions. The present paper is selfcontained and can be read without any familiarity with the theory of constructions, although the motivation of several of the notions considered here is given in [3]. In a future publication we will use the results of the present paper as the basis for a detailed study of a simplified form of the theory in [3].
Some model theory of abelian groups
Authors: Eklof Paul C. 
Published: May 2006

AbstractWe study the relations between abelian groups B and C that every universal (resp. universal-existential) sentence true in B is also true in C, and give algebraic criteria for these relations to hold. As a consequence we characterize the inductive complete theories of abelian groups and prove that they are exactly the model-complete theories.
General models, descriptions, and choice in type theory
Authors: Andrews Peter B. 
Published: May 2006

In [4] Alonzo Church introduced an elegant and expressive formulation of type theory with λ-conversion. In [8] Henkin introduced the concept of a general model for this system, such that a sentence A is a theorem if and only if it is true in all general models. The crucial clause in Henkin's definition of a general model ℳ is that for each assignment φ of values in ℳ to variables and for each wff A, there must be an appropriate value of A in ℳ. Hintikka points out in [10, p. 3] that this constitutes a rather strong requirement concerning the structure of a general model. Henkin draws attention to the problem of constructing nonstandard models for the theory of types in [9, p. 324].We shall use a simple idea of combinatory logic to find a characterization of general models which does not directly refer to wffs, and which is easier to work with in certain contexts. This characterization can be applied, with appropriate minor and obvious modifications, to a variety of formulations of type theory with λ-conversion. We shall be concerned with a language ℒ with extensionality in which there is no description or selection operator, and in which (for convenience) the sole primitive logical constants are the equality symbols Qoαα for each type α.