Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:20:41.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Realization of analysis into Explicit Mathematics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Sergei Tupailo
Sergei Tupailo*
Affiliation:
Institut für Informatik und Angewandte Mathematik, Universität Bern, Switzerland, E-Mail: sergei@iam.unibe.ch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract.

We define a novel interpretation of second order arithmetic into Explicit Mathematics. As a difference from standard -interpretation, which was used before and was shown to interpret only subsystems proof-theoretically weaker than T0. our interpretation can reach the full strength of T0. The -interpretation is an adaptation of Kleene's recursive readability, and is applicable only to intuitionistic theories.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , December 2001 , pp. 1848 - 1864
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2001

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]Aczel, P., The type theoretic interpretation of constructive set theory, Logic colloquium '77 (Mac-Intyre, A., Pacholski, L., and Paris, J., editors), 1978, pp. 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Aczel, P., The type theoretic interpretation of constructive set theory: inductive definitions, Logic, methodology and philosophy of science vii (Marcus, R. B.et al., editors), Amsterdam, 1986.Google Scholar
[3]Beeson, M., Foundations of constructive mathematics, Springer-Verlag, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Buchholz, W., Feferman, S., Pohlers, W., and Sieg, W., Iterated inductive definitions and subsystems of analysis, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 897, Springer-Verlag, 1981.Google Scholar
[5]Feferman, S., A language and axioms for explicit mathematics, Algebra and logic, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 450, Springer-Verlag, 1975, pp. 87–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Feferman, S., Constructive theories of functions and classes, Logic colloquium '78, 1979, pp. 159–224.Google Scholar
[7]Feferman, S. and Jäger, G., Systems of explicit mathematics with non-constructive μ-operator. Part II, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 79 (1996), no. 1, pp. 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Glass, T., Standardstrukturen für Systeme Expliziter Mathematik, Ph. D. Dissertation, Münster, 1993.Google Scholar
[9]Griffor, E. and Rathjen, M., The strength of some Martin-Löf type theories, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 33 (1994), pp. 347–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Jäger, G., A well-ordering prooffor Feferman's theory T0, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 23 (1983), pp. 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Jäger, G., Induction in elementary theory of types and names, Computer science logic '87, LNCS, vol. 329, Springer-Verlag, 1988, pp. 118–128.Google Scholar
[12]Jäger, G., Kahle, R., and Strahm, T., On applicative theories, Logic and foundations of mathematics (Cantini, A., Casari, E., and Minari, P. L., editors), 1999, pp. 83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Jäger, G. and Pohlers, W., Eine beweistheoretische Untersuchung von Δ21−CA+BI und verwandter Systeme, Sitz. Beyer. Akad. der Wissen., Math.-Natur. Klasse, (1982), pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
[14]Rathjen, M., Interpreting Mahlo set theory in Mahlo type theory, preprint, 1999.Google Scholar
[15]Rathjen, M., Griffor, E. R., and Palmgren, E., Inaccessibility in constructive set theory and type theory, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 94 (1998), pp. 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Setzer, A., Well-ordering proof for Martin-Löf type theory with W-type and one universe, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 92 (1998), pp. 113–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Tatsuta, M., Realizability for constructive theory offunctions and classes and its application to program synthesis, Proceedings of thirteenth annual IEEE symposium on logic in computer science, 1998, pp. 358–367.Google Scholar
[18]Troelstra, A., Realizability, Handbook of proof theory (Buss, S., editor), North-Holland, 1998, pp. 407–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Troelstra, A. and van Dallen, D., Constructivism in mathematics, vol. I, North-Holland, 1988.Google Scholar
[20]Tupailo, S., Realization of constructive set theory into explicit mathematics: a lower bound for impredicative Mahlo universe, Technical report IAM-00-004, University of Bern, Switzerland, submitted for publication.Google Scholar