Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:28:20.596Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A partial analysis of modified realizability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Jaap van Oosten
Jaap van Oosten*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Utrecht University, P.O. BOX 80.010, 3508 TA Utrecht, The, Netherlands, E-mail: jvoosten@math.uu.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A formalized version of Kleene realizability for intuitionistic first-order arithmetic HA was axiomatically characterized by Troelstra (see [2, 3.2]) as follows: for an arbitrary HA-sentence φ, HA ⊢ ∃x(x realizes φ) if and only if HA + ECT0 ⊢ φ.

Many notions of realizability have been characterized in this fashion: see [2] or [3] for details. For some notions, for example extensional realizability, it is necessary to pass to an extension of HA: realizability in HA is characterized by deducibility from certain axioms in an extension of HA.

The present note is concerned with modified realizability, seen as interpretation for HA. From semantical considerations (see [4]) it follows that this interpretation can be constructed as a combination of three ingredients:

i) Kleene realizability;

ii) Kripke forcing over a 2-element linear order P;

iii) The Friedman translation [1].

This will be shown in section 2. The Friedman translation (in the way we use it) introduces a new propositional constant V; hence we move to an extension HA(V) of HA. We must then define Kleene realizability and forcing for the extended language. Now let (φ)v be the result of the Friedman translation applied to φ. We obtain, in HA, that the sentence saying that φ is modified-realizable, is equivalent to the sentence which says that the statement “(φ)v is Kleene-realizable” is forced in P (see section 2).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 421 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2004

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]Friedman, H. M., Classically and intuitionistically provably recursive functions, Higher set theory (Müller, G. H. and Scott, D. S., editors), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 669, Springer, 1978, pp. 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Troelstra, A. S. (editor), Metamathematical investigation of intuitionistic arithmetic and analysis, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 344, Springer, 1973, With contributions by Troelstra, A. S., Smoryński, C. A., Zucker, J. I. and Howard, W. A..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Troelstra, A. S. (editor), Realizability, Handbook of proof theory (Buss, S. R., editor), North-Holland, 1998, pp. 407–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]van Oosten, J., The modified realizability topos, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, vol. 116 (1997), pp. 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar