An undecidability result for relation algebras

1979 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schönfeld

The elementary calculus of binary relations as developed by Tarski in [5] may be thought of as a certain part of the first-order predicate calculus. Though less expressive, its theory (i.e. the set of its valid sentences) was shown to be undecidable by Tarski in [6]. Translated into algebraic logic this means that the equational theory of the class of relation algebras is undecidable. Similarly it can be proved that the same holds for the (sub-) class of proper relation algebras.The idea in Tarski's proof is to describe a pairing function by which any quantifier prefix may be contracted. In this note we apply a different method to treat the case of finite structures. We prove theTheorem. The equational theory of the class of finite proper relation algebras is undecidable.This result was announced in [4]. The main tool is representing the graph of primitive recursive functions via the cardinalities in finite simple models of equations.

1992 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 832-843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Balázs Biró

This paper deals with relation, cylindric and polyadic equality algebras. First of all it addresses a problem of B. Jónsson. He asked whether relation set algebras can be expanded by finitely many new operations in a “reasonable” way so that the class of these expansions would possess a finite equational base. The present paper gives a negative answer to this problem: Our main theorem states that whenever Rs+ is a class that consists of expansions of relation set algebras such that each operation of Rs+ is logical in Jónsson's sense, i.e., is the algebraic counterpart of some (derived) connective of first-order logic, then the equational theory of Rs+ has no finite axiom systems. Similar results are stated for the other classes mentioned above. As a corollary to this theorem we can solve a problem of Tarski and Givant [87], Namely, we claim that the valid formulas of certain languages cannot be axiomatized by a finite set of logical axiom schemes. At the same time we give a negative solution for a version of a problem of Henkin and Monk [74] (cf. also Monk [70] and Németi [89]).Throughout we use the terminology, notation and results of Henkin, Monk, Tarski [71] and [85]. We also use results of Maddux [89a].Notation. RA denotes the class of relation algebras, Rs denotes the class of relation set algebras and RRA is the class of representable relation algebras, i.e. the class of subdirect products of relation set algebras. The symbols RA, Rs and RRA abbreviate also the expressions relation algebra, relation set algebra and representable relation algebra, respectively.For any class C of similar algebras EqC is the set of identities that hold in C, while Eq1C is the set of those identities in EqC that contain at most one variable symbol. (We note that Henkin et al. [85] uses the symbol EqC in another sense.)


2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Stebletsova ◽  
Yde Venema

AbstractWith each projective geometry we can associate a Lyndon algebra. Such an algebra always satisfies Tarski's axioms for relation algebras and Lyndon algebras thus form an interesting connection between the fields of projective geometry and algebraic logic. In this paper we prove that if G is a class of projective geometries which contains an infinite projective geometry of dimension at least three, then the class L(G) of Lyndon algebras associated with projective geometries in G has an undecidable equational theory. In our proof we develop and use a connection between projective geometries and diagonal-free cylindric algebras.


2021 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Hirsch ◽  
Jaš Šemrl

AbstractThe motivation for using demonic calculus for binary relations stems from the behaviour of demonic turing machines, when modelled relationally. Relational composition (; ) models sequential runs of two programs and demonic refinement ($$\sqsubseteq $$ ⊑ ) arises from the partial order given by modeling demonic choice ($$\sqcup $$ ⊔ ) of programs (see below for the formal relational definitions). We prove that the class $$R(\sqsubseteq , ;)$$ R ( ⊑ , ; ) of abstract $$(\le , \circ )$$ ( ≤ , ∘ ) structures isomorphic to a set of binary relations ordered by demonic refinement with composition cannot be axiomatised by any finite set of first-order $$(\le , \circ )$$ ( ≤ , ∘ ) formulas. We provide a fairly simple, infinite, recursive axiomatisation that defines $$R(\sqsubseteq , ;)$$ R ( ⊑ , ; ) . We prove that a finite representable $$(\le , \circ )$$ ( ≤ , ∘ ) structure has a representation over a finite base. This appears to be the first example of a signature for binary relations with composition where the representation class is non-finitely axiomatisable, but where the finite representation property holds for finite structures.


2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBIN HIRSCH ◽  
SZABOLCS MIKULÁS

We prove that algebras of binary relations whose similarity type includes intersection, union, and one of the residuals of relation composition form a nonfinitely axiomatizable quasivariety and that the equational theory is not finitely based. We apply this result to the problem of the completeness of the positive fragment of relevance logic with respect to binary relations.


1989 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1018-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Perkins

A computable groupoid is an algebra ‹N, g› where N is the set of natural numbers and g is a recursive (total) binary operation on N. A set L of natural numbers is a computable list of computable groupoids iff L is recursive, ‹N, ϕe› is a computable groupoid for each e ∈ L, and e ∈ L whenever e codes a primitive recursive description of a binary operation on N.Theorem 1. Let L be any computable list of computable groupoids. The set {e ∈ L: the equational theory of ‹N, ϕe› is finitely axiomatizable} is not recursive.Theorem 2. Let S be any recursive set of positive integers. A computable groupoid GS can be constructed so that S is inifinite iff GS has a finitely axiomatizable equational theory.The problem of deciding which finite algebras have finitely axiomatizable equational theories has remained open since it was first posed by Tarski in the early 1960's. Indeed, it is still not known whether the set of such finite algebras is recursively (or corecursively) enumerable. McKenzie [7] has shown that this question of finite axiomatizability for any (finite) algebra of finite type can be reduced to that for a (finite) groupoid.


1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanley Burris

AbstractIn an earlier paper we proved that a universal Horn class generated by finitely many finite structures has a model companion. If the language has only finitely many fundamental operations then the theory of the model companion admits a primitive recursive elimination of quantifiers and is primitive recursive. The theory of the model companion is ℵ0-categorical iff it is complete iff the universal Horn class has the joint embedding property iff the universal Horn class is generated by a single finite structure. In the last section we look at structure theorems for the model companions of universal Horn classes generated by functionally complete algebras, in particular for the cases of rings and groups.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-455
Author(s):  
LUCA BELLOTTI

AbstractWe consider the consistency proof for a weak fragment of arithmetic published by von Neumann in 1927. This proof is rather neglected in the literature on the history of consistency proofs in the Hilbert school. We explain von Neumann’s proof and argue that it fills a gap between Hilbert’s consistency proofs for the so-called elementary calculus of free variables with a successor and a predecessor function and Ackermann’s consistency proof for second-order primitive recursive arithmetic. In particular, von Neumann’s proof is the first rigorous proof of the consistency of an axiomatization of the first-order theory of a successor function.


1965 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaisi Takeuti

Although Peano's arithmetic can be developed in set theories, it can also be developed independently. This is also true for the theory of ordinal numbers. The author formalized the theory of ordinal numbers in logical systems GLC (in [2]) and FLC (in [3]). These logical systems which contain the concept of ‘arbitrary predicates’ or ‘arbitrary functions’ are of higher order than the first order predicate calculus with equality. In this paper we shall develop the theory of ordinal numbers in the first order predicate calculus with equality as an extension of Peano's arithmetic. This theory will prove to be easy to manage and fairly powerful in the following sense: If A is a sentence of the theory of ordinal numbers, then A is a theorem of our system if and only if the natural translation of A in set theory is a theorem of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It will be treated as a natural extension of Peano's arithmetic. The latter consists of axiom schemata of primitive recursive functions and mathematical induction, while the theory of ordinal numbers consists of axiom schemata of primitive recursive functions of ordinal numbers (cf. [5]), of transfinite induction, of replacement and of cardinals. The latter three axiom schemata can be considered as extensions of mathematical induction.In the theory of ordinal numbers thus developed, we shall construct a model of Zermelo-Fraenkel's set theory by following Gödel's construction in [1]. Our intention is as follows: We shall define a relation α ∈ β as a primitive recursive predicate, which corresponds to F′ α ε F′ β in [1]; Gödel defined the constructible model Δ using the primitive notion ε in the universe or, in other words, using the whole set theory.


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.


2016 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 403-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaowang Zhang ◽  
Jan Van den Bussche ◽  
François Picalausa

The satisfiability problem for SPARQL 1.0 patterns is undecidable in general, since the relational algebra can be emulated using such patterns. The goal of this paper is to delineate the boundary of decidability of satisfiability in terms of the constraints allowed in filter conditions. The classes of constraints considered are bound-constraints, negated bound- constraints, equalities, nonequalities, constant-equalities, and constant-nonequalities. The main result of the paper can be summarized by saying that, as soon as inconsistent filter conditions can be formed, satisfiability is undecidable. The key insight in each case is to find a way to emulate the set difference operation. Undecidability can then be obtained from a known undecidability result for the algebra of binary relations with union, composition, and set difference. When no inconsistent filter conditions can be formed, satisfiability is decidable by syntactic checks on bound variables and on the use of literals. Although the problem is shown to be NP-complete, it is experimentally shown that the checks can be implemented efficiently in practice. The paper also points out that satisfiability for the so-called ‘well-designed’ patterns can be decided by a check on bound variables and a check for inconsistent filter conditions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document