Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T07:39:28.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On strong provability predicates and the associated modal logics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Konstantin N. Ignatiev
Konstantin N. Ignatiev*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, E-mail: ign@math.mit.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

PA is Peano Arithmetic. Pr(x) is the usual Σ1,-formula representing provability in PA. A strong provability predicate is a formula which has the same properties as Pr(·) but is not Σ1. An example: Q is ω-provable if PA + ¬Q is ω-inconsistent (Boolos [4]). In [5] Dzhaparidze introduced a joint provability logic for iterated ω-provability and obtained its arithmetical completeness.

In this paper we prove some further modal properties of Dzhaparidze's logic, e.g., the fixed point property and the Craig interpolation lemma. We also consider other examples of the strong provability predicates and their applications.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 249 - 290
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Artemov, S., Extensions of arithmetic and the modal theories connected with them, Sixth LMPS Congress, Abstracts, Sections 1–4, pages 15–19, Hannover, 1979. (Abstract)Google Scholar
[2]Berarducci, A., The interpretability logic of Peano Arithmetic, this Journal, vol. 55 (1990), pp. 1059–1089.Google Scholar
[3]Boolos, G., On deciding the truth of certain statements involving the notion of consistency, this Journal, vol. 41 (1976), pp. 779–781.Google Scholar
[4]Boolos, G., ω-consistency and the diamond, Studia Logica, vol. 39 (1980), pp. 237–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Dzhaparidze, G., The polymodal provability logic, Intensional logics and the logical structure of theories, Tbilisi, 1988. (Russian)Google Scholar
[6]Gleit, Z., and Goldfarb, W., Characters and fixed points in provability logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 31 (1990), pp. 23–36.Google Scholar
[7]Guaspari, D., Partially conservative extensions of arithmetic, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 254 (1979), pp. 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Ignatiev, K., Partial conservativity and modal logics, ITLI Prepublication Series X-91–04, Institute for Language, Logic, and Information, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1991.Google Scholar
[9]Ignatiev, K., The closed fragment of Dzhaparidze's polymodal logic and the logic of Σ 1 conservativity, ITLI Prepublication Series X-92–02, Institute for Language, Logic, and Information, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1992.Google Scholar
[10]Montagna, F., On the diagonalizable algebra of peano arithmetic, Unione Matematica ltaliana. Bollettino. B., vol. 66 (1979), pp. 795–812.Google Scholar
[11]Solovay, R., Provability interpretations of modal logic, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 25 (1976), pp. 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Visser, A., A course in bimodal provability logic, Logic Group Preprint Series 20, Department of Philosophy, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, 05 1987.Google Scholar