R. K. Meyer once gave precise form to the question of whether relevant implication can be defined in any modal system, and his answer was ‘no’. In the present paper, we extend S4, first with propositional quantifiers, to the system S4π+; and then with definite propositional descriptions, to the system S4π+ip. We show that relevant implication can in some sense be defined in the modal system S4π+ip, although it cannot be defined in S4π+.

Let L0, L1 and L2 be countable languages with L ∩ L1 = L0. Let M0 be an L0-structure and Mi, an expansion of M0 to an Li,-structure (i = 1,2). We will call an L1 ∪ L2-structure M an amalgamation of M1 and M2 if M∣Li ≅ Mi, (i = 1,2). Let's consider the following problem.

(*) Suppose that both M1 and M2 belong to the class . Can we always find an amalgamation M in ?

Of course the existence of such an amalgamation depends on the class L. Some examples of and the answers are given below.

1. = Countably saturated strongly minimal structures with the DMP In [3], Hrushovski showed that any two strongly minimal theories formulated in totally different languages have a common extension which is still strongly minimal and with the DMP (DMP is the property that states that if a point is sufficiently close to ā, then φ(, ) has the same rank and the same degree as φ(, ā).) His proof essentially shows that if L0 = ∅ then any two countably saturated strongly minimal structures with the DMP have a strongly minimal amalgamation. Also he gave an example that shows the condition L0 = ∅ is necessary.

2. = ℵ1-categorical countable structures. Let M1 be the structure (ℚ, +) and let M2 be the {E, F}-structure defined by: (i) E is an equivalence relation which divides the universe into two infinite classes A and B, (ii) F is a bijection between A and B.

In this paper we formulate a notion similar to o-minimality but appropriate for the p-adics. The paper is in a sense a sequel to [11] and [5]. In [11] a notion of minimality was formulated, as follows. Suppose that L, L+ are first-order languages and + is an L+-structure whose reduct to L is . Then + is said to be -minimal if, for every N+ elementarily equivalent to +, every parameterdefinable subset of its domain N+ is definable with parameters by a quantifier-free L-formula. Observe that if L has a single binary relation which in is interpreted by a total order on M, then we have just the notion of strong o-minimality, from [13]; and by a theorem from [6], strong o-minimality is equivalent to o-minimality. If L has no relations, functions, or constants (other than equality) then the notion is just strong minimality.

In [11], -minimality is investigated for a number of structures . In particular, the C-relation of [1] was considered, in place of the total order in the definition of strong o-minimality. The C-relation is essentially the ternary relation which naturally holds on the maximal chains of a sufficiently nice tree; see [1], [11] or [5] for more detail, and for axioms. Much of the motivation came from the observation that a C-relation on a field F which is preserved by the affine group AGL(1,F) (consisting of permutations (a,b) : x ↦ ax + b, where a ∈ F \ {0} and b ∈ F) is the same as a non-trivial valuation: to get a C-relation from a valuation ν, put C(x;y,z) if and only if ν(y − x) < ν(y − z).

Elimination of imaginaries for 1-variable definable equivalence relations is proved for a theory of algebraically closed valued fields with new sorts for the disc spaces. The proof is constructive, and is based upon a new framework for proving elimination of imaginaries, in terms of prototypes which form a canonical family of formulas for defining each set that is definable with parameters. The proof also depends upon the formal development of the tree-like structure of valued fields, in terms of valued trees, and a decomposition of valued trees which is used in the coding of certain sets of discs.

In this note it is shown that in explicit mathematics the strong power type axiom is inconsistent with (uniform) elementary comprehension and discuss some general aspects of power types in explicit mathematics.

In the twenties Brouwer established the well-known continuity theorem “every real function is locally uniformly continuous,” [3, 2, 5]. From this theorem one immediately concludes that the continuum is indecomposable (unzerlegbar), i.e., if ℝ = A ∪ B and A ∩ B = ∅ (denoted by ℝ = A + B), then ℝ = A or ℝ = B.

Brouwer deduced the indecomposability directly from the fan theorem (cf. the 1927 Berline Lectures, [7, p. 49]).

The theorem was published for the first time in [6], it was used to refute the principle of the excluded middle: ¬∀x ∈ ℝ (x ∈ ℚ ∨ ¬x ∈ ℚ).

The indecomposability of ℝ is a peculiar feature of constructive universa, it shows that ℝ is much more closely knit in constructive mathematics, than in classically mathematics. The classically comparable fact is the topological connectedness of ℝ. In a way this characterizes the position of ℝ: the only (classically) connected subsets of ℝ are the various kinds of segments. In intuitionistic mathematics the situation is different; the continuum has, as it were, a syrupy nature, one cannot simply take away one point. In the classical continuum one can, thanks to the principle of the excluded third, do so. To put it picturesquely, the classical continuum is the frozen intuitionistic continuum. If one removes one point from the intuitionistic continuum, there still are all those points for which it is unknown whether or not they belong to the remaining part.

Let κ be an uncountable cardinal and the edges of a complete graph with κ vertices be colored with ℵ0 colors. For the Erdős-Rado theorem implies that there is an infinite monochromatic subgraph. However, if , then it may be impossible to find a monochromatic triangle. This paper is concerned with the latter situation. We consider the types of colorings of finite subgraphs that must occur when . In particular, we are concerned with the case ℵ1 ≤ κ ≤ ℵω.

The study of these color patterns (known as identities) has a history that involves the existence of compactness theorems for two cardinal models [4]. When the graph being colored has size ℵ1, the identities that must occur ((ℵ1)) have been classified by Shelah [6]. If the graph has size greater than or equal to ℵω the identities that must occur ((ℵω)) have also been classified in [5]. This leaves open the question of how the sets (ℵm) (2 ≤ m < ω) fit between (ℵ1) and ⊆ (ℵω). Some progress in this direction has been made in the paper [2]. It is there shown that if ZFC is consistent then so is for each m < ω. The number of colors is fixed at ℵ0 as it is the natural place to start and the results here can be generalized to more colors. We first give some definitions and establish some notation.

The main result of this note is showing that if γ and μ are regular uncountable cardinals with γ ≤ μ then the non-stationary ideal (henceforth the NS ideal) on can be precipitous. This strengthens a result of [1] showing, under the same hypotheses, that a restriction of this ideal can be precipitous. See [1, Theorem 29, p. 36]. In fact, we show that even the strongly NS ideal on is precipitous in our model (since the former ideal is a restriction of the latter, the latter's being precipitous is a stronger assertion).

More precisely, by starting with a model of “ZFC + ‘κ is a supercompact cardinal’ + ‘μ < κ is a regular uncountable cardinal’ ”, we generate a model of ZFC where all cardinals below and including μ are not collapsed and where the NS and strongly NS ideals on Pγμ are precipitous, for all regular uncountable γ which are less than or equal to μ.

As far as consistency strength, we can obtain the same result even if κ is only Woodin in the ground model. However, the proof of this result is more complicated than in the case when κ is a supercompact cardinal. Furthermore, there are essentially no new ideas in adapting the proof relative to a supercompact cardinal to that relative to a Woodin cardinal beyond what appears in, e.g., [2]. We therefore give the complete proof relative to the existence of a supercompact cardinal and then briefly sketch the proof relative to the existence of a Woodin cardinal, using [2] as a reference.

We prove that no restriction of the sine function to any (open and nonempty) interval is definable in 〈R, +, ·, ×, <, exp, constants〉, and that no restriction of the exponential function to an (open and nonempty) interval is definable in 〈R, +, ·, <, sin0, constants〉, where sin0(x) = sin(x) for x ∈ [—π, π], and sin0(x) = 0 for all x ∉ [—π, π].

There are inequalities between cardinal characteristics of the continuum that are true in any model of ZFC, but without a Borel morphism proving the inequality. We answer some questions from Blass [1].

Limiting identification of r.e. indexes for r.e. languages (from a presentation of elements of the language) and limiting identification of programs for computable functions (from a graph of the function) have served as models for investigating the boundaries of learnability. Recently, a new approach to the study of “intrinsic” complexity of identification in the limit has been proposed. This approach, instead of dealing with the resource requirements of the learning algorithm, uses the notion of reducibility from recursion theory to compare and to capture the intuitive difficulty of learning various classes of concepts. Freivalds, Kinber, and Smith have studied this approach for function identification and Jain and Sharma have studied it for language identification.

The present paper explores the structure of these reducibilities in the context of language identification. It is shown that there is an infinite hierarchy of language classes that represent learning problems of increasing difficulty. It is also shown that the language classes in this hierarchy are incomparable, under the reductions introduced, to the collection of pattern languages.

Richness of the structure of intrinsic complexity is demonstrated by proving that any finite, acyclic, directed graph can be embedded in the reducibility structure. However, it is also established that this structure is not dense. The question of embedding any infinite, acyclic, directed graph is open.

To show that a formula A is not provable in propositional classical logic, it suffices to exhibit a finite boolean model which does not satisfy A. A similar property holds in the intuitionistic case, with Kripke models instead of boolean models (see for instance [11]). One says that the propositional classical logic and the propositional intuitionistic logic satisfy a finite model property. In particular, they are decidable: there is a semi-algorithm for provability (proof search) and a semi-algorithm for non provability (model search). For that reason, a logic which is undecidable, such as first order logic, cannot satisfy a finite model property.

The case of linear logic is more complicated. The full propositional fragment LL has a complete semantics in terms of phase spaces [2, 3], but it is undecidable [9]. The multiplicative additive fragment MALL is decidable, in fact PSPACE-complete [9], but the decidability of the multiplicative exponential fragment MELL is still an open problem. For affine logic, that is, linear logic with weakening, the situation is somewhat better: the full propositional fragment LLW is decidable [5].

Here, we show that the finite phase semantics is complete for MALL and for LLW, but not for MELL. In particular, this gives a new proof of the decidability of LLW. The noncommutative case is mentioned, but not handled in detail.

A Partial Combinatory Algebra is completable if it can be extended to a total one. In [1] it is asked (question 11, posed by D. Scott, H. Barendregt, and G. Mitschke) if every PCA can be completed. A negative answer to this question was given by Klop in [12, 11]; moreover he provided a sufficient condition for completability of a PCA (M, •, K,S) in the form of ten axioms (inequalities) on terms of M. We prove that just one of these axiom (the so called Barendregt's axiom) is sufficient to guarantee (a slightly weaker notion of) completability.

We prove that a (recursively) enumerable degree is contiguous iff it is locally distributive. This settles a twenty-year old question going back to Ladner and Sasso. We also prove that strong contiguity and contiguity coincide, settling a question of the first author, and prove that no m-topped degree is contiguous, settling a question of the first author and Carl Jockusch [11]. Finally, we prove some results concerning local distributivity and relativized weak truth table reducibility.

Type two cuts, bad cuts and very bad cuts are introduced in [10] for studying the relationship between Loeb measure and U-topology of a hyperfinite time line in an ω1-saturated nonstandard universe. The questions concerning the existence of those cuts are asked there. In this paper we answer, fully or partially, some of those questions by showing that: (1) type two cuts exist, (2) the ℵ1-isomorphism property implies that bad cuts exist, but no bad cuts are very bad.

An infinite set X is given. D. Gale, in correspondence with J. Mycielski, described the following game in which players one and two play an inning per positive integer: In the nth inning one chooses a finite subset Xn of X, and two chooses a point xn from (X1∪ … ∪Xn)\{x1,…,xn−1}. A play

is won by two if . Gale asked whether two could have a winning strategy which depends for each n on knowledge of only the contents of the set

In mathematical terms, is there a function F defined on the collection of finite subsets of X such that:

for every sequence X1, x1, …, Xn, xn,…. where each Xn is a finite subset

of X and for each n

we have

We shall call a strategy of this sort a remainder strategy for two. If there is some finite subset U of X such that F(U) ∉ U, then F cannot be a winning remainder strategy for two, because one can defeat F by choosing U each inning. So, when studying remainder strategies for two we may as well assume that for each finite set U ⊂ X, F(U) ∈ U.

We analyze Zorn's Lemma and some of its consequences for Boolean algebras in a constructive setting. We show that Zorn's Lemma is persistent in the sense that, if it holds in the underlying set theory, in a properly stated form it continues to hold in all intuitionistic type theories of a certain natural kind. (Observe that the axiom of choice cannot be persistent in this sense since it implies the law of excluded middle.) We also establish the persistence of some familiar results in the theory of (complete) Boolean algebras—notably, the proposition that every complete Boolean algebra is an absolute subretract. This (almost) resolves a question of Banaschewski and Bhutani as to whether the Sikorski extension theorem for Boolean algebras is persistent.

Let k and l be two multiplicatively independent integers, and let L ⊆ ℕn be a l-recognizable set which is not definable in 〈ℕ; +〉. We prove that the elementary theory of 〈ℕ; +, Vk, L〉, where Vk(x) denotes the greatest power of k dividing x, is undecidable. This result leads to a new proof of the Cobham-Semënov theorem.

In the present paper we are interested in simple forcing notions and Forcing Axioms. A starting point for our investigations was the article [4] in which several problems were posed. We answer some of those problems here.

In the first section we deal with the problem of adding Cohen reals by simple forcing notions. Here we interpret simple as of small size. We try to establish as weak as possible versions of Martin Axiom sufficient to conclude that some forcing notions of size less than the continuum add a Cohen real. For example we show that MA(σ-centered) is enough to cause that every small σ-linked forcing notion adds a Cohen real (see Theorem 1.2) and MA(Cohen) implies that every small forcing notion adding an unbounded real adds a Cohen real (see Theorem 1.6). A new almost ωω-bounding σ-centered forcing notion ℚ⊚ appears naturally here. This forcing notion is responsible for adding unbounded reals in this sense, that MA(ℚ⊚) implies that every small forcing notion adding a new real adds an unbounded real (see Theorem 1.13).

In the second section we are interested in Anti-Martin Axioms for simple forcing notions. Here we interpret simple as nicely definable. Our aim is to show the consistency of AMA for as large as possible class of ccc forcing notions with large continuum. It has been known that AMA(ccc) implies CH, but it has been (rightly) expected that restrictions to regular (simple) forcing notions might help.

In this paper we give a constructive proof of the pointfree version of Tychonoff's theorem within formal topology, using ideas from Coquand's proof in [7]. To deal with pointfree topology Coquand uses Johnstone's coverages. Because of the representation theorem in [3], from a mathematical viewpoint these structures are equivalent to formal topologies but there is an essential difference also. Namely, formal topologies have been developed within Martin Löf's constructive type theory (cf. [16]), which thus gives a direct way of formalizing them (cf. [4]).

The most important aspect of our proof is that it is based on an inductive definition of the topological product of formal topologies. This fact allows us to transform Coquand's proof into a proof by structural induction on the last rule applied in a derivation of a cover. The inductive generation of a cover, together with a modification of the inductive property proposed by Coquand, makes it possible to formulate our proof of Tychonoff s theorem in constructive type theory. There is thus a clear difference to earlier localic proofs of Tychonoff's theorem known in the literature (cf. [9, 10, 12, 14, 27]). Indeed we not only avoid to use the axiom of choice, but reach constructiveness in a very strong sense. Namely, our proof of Tychonoff's theorem supplies an algorithm which, given a cover of the product space, computes a finite subcover, provided that there exists a similar algorithm for each component space.