On the Craig-Lyndon interpolation theorem

1968 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-274
Author(s):  
Arnold Oberschelp
Keyword(s):  
Interpolation Theorem ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Identity Symbol

In his paper [3] Henkin proved for a first order language with identity symbol but without operation symbols the following version of the Craig-Lyndon interpolation theorem:Theorem 1. If Γ╞Δ then there is a formula θ such that Γ ├Δand(i) any relation symbol with a positive (negative) occurrence in θ has a positive (negative) occurrence in some formula of Γ.

An Interpolation Theorem

2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Otto
Keyword(s):  
Interpolation Theorem ◽  
Order Logic ◽  
First Order Logic ◽  
Elementary Model ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
First Order ◽  
Theoretic Proof ◽  
Universal Quantification ◽  
The Given ◽  
Interpolation Result

AbstractLyndon's Interpolation Theorem asserts that for any valid implication between two purely relational sentences of first-order logic, there is an interpolant in which each relation symbol appears positively (negatively) only if it appears positively (negatively) in both the antecedent and the succedent of the given implication. We prove a similar, more general interpolation result with the additional requirement that, for some fixed tuple of unary predicates U, all formulae under consideration have all quantifiers explicitly relativised to one of the U. Under this stipulation, existential (universal) quantification over U contributes a positive (negative) occurrence of U.It is shown how this single new interpolation theorem, obtained by a canonical and rather elementary model theoretic proof, unifies a number of related results: the classical characterisation theorems concerning extensions (substructures) with those concerning monotonicity, as well as a many-sorted interpolation theorem focusing on positive vs. negative occurrences of predicates and on existentially vs. universally quantified sorts.

Infinitary analogs of theorems from first order model theory

1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome Malitz
Keyword(s):  
Model Theory ◽  
Expressive Power ◽  
Direct Products ◽  
Order Model ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
First Order ◽  
Identity Symbol

The material presented here belongs to the model theory of the Lκ, λ languages. Our results are either infinitary analogs of important theorems in finitary model theory, or else show that such analogs do not exist.For example, it is well known that whenever i, and , have the same true Lω, ω sentences (i.e., are elementarily equivalent) for i = 1, 2, then the cardinal sums 1 + 2 and + have the same true Lω, ω sentences, and the direct products 1 · 2 and · have the same true Lω, ω sentences [3]. We show that this is true when ‘Lω, ω’ is replaced by ‘Lκ, λ’ if and only if κ is strongly inaccessible. For Lω1, ω this settles a question, posed by Lopez-Escobar [7].In §3 we give a complete description of the expressive power of those sentences of Lκ, λ in which the identity symbol is the only relation symbol which occurs. This extends a result by Hanf [4].

scholarly journals Completeness of two theories on ordered abelian groups and embedding relations

1980 ◽  
Vol 77 ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuichi Komori
Keyword(s):  
Binary Relation ◽  
Abelian Groups ◽  
Function Symbol ◽  
Binary Function ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
Unary Function ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Unary Relation ◽  
Binary Relation Symbol

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”).

Interpolation theorems for Lk,k2+

1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruggero Ferro
Keyword(s):  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Interpolation Theorem ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Strong Limit ◽  
First Order ◽  
Limit Cardinal ◽  
Saturated Models ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Craig’S Interpolation Theorem

Chang, in [1], proves an interpolation theorem (Theorem I, remark b)) for a first-order language. The proof of Chang's theorem uses essentially nonsimple devices, like special and ω1-saturated models.In remark e) in [1], Chang asks if there is a simpler proof of his Theorem I.In [1], Chang proves also another interpolation theorem (Theorem II), which is not an extension of his Theorem I, but extends Craig's interpolation theorem to Lα+,ω languages with interpolant in Lα+,α where α is a strong limit cardinal of cofinality ω.In remark k) in [1], Chang asks if there is a generalization of both Theorems I and II in [1], or at least a generalization of both Theorem I in [1] and Lopez-Escobar's interpolation theorem in [7].Maehara and Takeuti, in [8], show that there is a completely different proof of Chang's interpolation Theorem I as a consequence of their interpolation theorems. The proofs of these theorems of Maehara and Takeuti are proof theoretical in character, involving the notion of cut-free natural deduction, and it uses devices as simple as those needed for the usual Craig's interpolation theorem. Hence this can be considered as a positive answer to Chang's question in remark e) in [1].

On countable fractions from an elementary class

1994 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 1410-1413
Author(s):  
C. J. Ash
Keyword(s):  
Model Theory ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
First Order ◽  
Elementary Class ◽  
Free Variables ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Skolem Theorem ◽  
Elementary Result ◽  
Countable Models

The following fairly elementary result seems to raise possibilities for the study of countable models of a theory in a countable language. For the terminology of model theory we refer to [CK].Let L be a countable first-order language. Let L′ be the relational language having, for each formula φ of L and each sequence υ1,…,υn of variables including the free variables of φ, an n-ary relation symbol Pφ. For any L-structure and any formula Ψ(υ) of L, we define the Ψ-fraction of to be the L′-structure Ψ whose universe consists of those elements of satisfying Ψ(υ) and whose relations {Rφ}φϵL are defined by letting a1,…,an satisfy Rφ in Ψ if, and only if, a1,…, an satisfy φ in .An L-elementary class means the class of all L-structures satisfying each of some set of sentences of L. The countable part of an L-elementary class K means the class of all countable L-structures from K.Theorem. Let K be an L-elementary class and let Ψ(υ) be a formula of L. Then the class of countable Ψ-fractions of structures in K is the countable part of some L′-elementary class.Comment. By the downward Löwenheim-Skolem theorem, the countable Ψ-fractions of structures in K are the same as the Ψ-fractions of countable structures in K.Proof. We give a set Σ′ of L′-sentences whose countable models are exactly the countable Ψ-fractions of structures in K.

Modal formulas are either elementary or not ΣΔ-elementary

1976 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 436-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. F. A. K. van Benthem
Keyword(s):  
Modal Logic ◽  
Propositional Formula ◽  
First Order ◽  
Propositional Modal Logic ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Power Set ◽  
Binary Predicate ◽  
Truth Definition ◽  
Identity Symbol

In this paper we prove that if L is a set of modal propositional formulas then FR(L) (the class of all frames in which every formula of L holds) is elementary, Δ-elementary or not ΣΔ-elementary. For single modal formulas the second of these cases does not occur.The model theoretic terminology and results used here are from [1]. (The underlying first order language contains only one, binary, predicate letter in addition to the identity symbol.) We presuppose familiarity with the usual notions and notations of propositional modal logic. A structure for our first order language is called a frame. (So a frame is an ordered couple 〈W, R〉 with domain W and R a binary predicate on W, i.e. a subset of W × W.) A valuation V on F is a function from the set of proposition letters to the power set of W. Using the well-known Kripke truth definition V can be extended to a function from the set of all modal propositional formulas to the power set of W. A modal propositional formula φ holds in a frame F (= 〈W, R〉) if, for all V on F, V(φ) = W. Notation: FR(φ) for the class of all frames in which φ holds. For a set L of modal propositional formulas we define FR(L) as ⋂φ∈LFR(φ). Obviously both FR(L) and cFR(L) (the complement of FR(L)) are closed under isomorphisms.

Satisfaction for n-th order languages defined in n-th order languages

1965 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Craig
Keyword(s):  
Interpolation Theorem ◽  
The Other ◽  
Present Formulation ◽  
Finite Axiomatizability ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language

In this paper we show that for n-th order languages L′ with p nonlogical constants, 2 ≦ n < ω, 0 ≦ p < ω, a notion of satisfaction can be defined in an n-th order language containing one additional nonlogical constant, say S. By the usual methods we also show that this notion cannot be defined in L′. Hence, in its present formulation, Beth's Theorem in [1] for first order languages has no analogue for L′.Our defining expression is such that, given any values of the other nonlogical constants and any appropriate m-tuple, it allows us to determine whether or not the m-tuple belongs to the value S of S without considering the totality of objects which are of the same type as S. Whether every definition in an n-th order language is equivalent to one thus “predicative”, and hence whether there is a formulation of Beth's Theorem which generalizes to higher orders, we do not know.The falsehood for L′ of the analogue of Beth's Theorem implies the falsehood of an analogue of an interpolation theorem for first order languages. The above definability of satisfaction for L′ implies a result on finite axiomatizability in slightly richer languages. Details are given in § 4.

Some characterization theorems for infinitary universal Horn logic without equality

1996 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 1242-1260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pilar Dellunde ◽  
Ramon Jansana
Keyword(s):  
Algebraic Logic ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Abstract Algebraic Logic ◽  
Relation Symbol ◽  
Horn Logic ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Unary Relation ◽  
Theoretic Point ◽  
Horn Fragment

In this paper we mainly study preservation theorems for two fragments of the infinitary languages Lκκ, with κ regular, without the equality symbol: the universal Horn fragment and the universal strict Horn fragment. In particular, when κ is ω, we obtain the corresponding theorems for the first-order case.The universal Horn fragment of first-order logic (with equality) has been extensively studied; for references see [10], [7] and [8]. But the universal Horn fragment without equality, used frequently in logic programming, has received much less attention from the model theoretic point of view. At least to our knowledge, the problem of obtaining preservation results for it has not been studied before by model theorists. In spite of this, in the field of abstract algebraic logic we find a theorem which, properly translated, is a preservation result for the strict universal Horn fragment of infinitary languages without equality which, apart from function symbols, have only a unary relation symbol. This theorem is due to J. Czelakowski; see [5], Theorem 6.1, and [6], Theorem 5.1. A. Torrens [12] also has an unpublished result dealing with matrices of sequent calculi which, properly translated, is a preservation result for the strict universal Horn fragment of a first-order language. And in [2] of W. J. Blok and D. Pigozzi we find Corollary 6.3 which properly translated corresponds to our Corollary 19, but for the case of a first-order language that apart from its function symbols has only one κ-ary relation symbol, and for strict universal Horn sentences. The study of these results is the basis for the present work. In the last part of the paper, Section 4, we will make these connections clear and obtain some of these results from our theorems. In this way we hope to make clear two things: (1) The field of abstract algebraic logic can be seen, in part, as a disguised study of universal Horn logic without equality and so has an added interest. (2) A general study of universal Horn logic without equality from a model theoretic point of view can be of help in the field of abstract algebraic logic.

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 ON PRODUCTS OF ELEMENTARILY INDIVISIBLE STRUCTURES

2016 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 951-971
Author(s):  
NADAV MEIR
Keyword(s):  
New Products ◽  
Elementary Substructure ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Language ◽  
Image Position

AbstractWe say a structure ${\cal M}$ in a first-order language ${\cal L}$ is indivisible if for every coloring of its universe in two colors, there is a monochromatic substructure ${\cal M}\prime \subseteq {\cal M}$ such that ${\cal M}\prime \cong {\cal M}$. Additionally, we say that ${\cal M}$ is symmetrically indivisible if ${\cal M}\prime$ can be chosen to be symmetrically embedded in ${\cal M}$ (that is, every automorphism of ${\cal M}\prime$ can be extended to an automorphism of ${\cal M}$). Similarly, we say that ${\cal M}$ is elementarily indivisible if ${\cal M}\prime$ can be chosen to be an elementary substructure. We define new products of structures in a relational language. We use these products to give recipes for construction of elementarily indivisible structures which are not transitive and elementarily indivisible structures which are not symmetrically indivisible, answering two questions presented by A. Hasson, M. Kojman, and A. Onshuus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document