Let T be a recursive theory in the language of first order Arithmetic. We prove that if T extends: (a) the scheme of parameter free Δ1-minimization (plus exp). or (b) the scheme of parameter free Π1-induction, then there are no Σ1-maximal models with respect to T. As a consequence, we obtain a new proof of an unpublished theorem of Jeff Paris stating that Σ1-maximal models with respect to IΔ0 + exp do not satisfy the scheme of Σ1-collection BΣ1.

We study function fields over p-adically closed fields in the first-order language of fields. Using ideas of Duret [D], we show that the field of constants is definable, and that the genus is an elementary property.

Validity in recursive structures was investigated by several authors. Kreisel [10] has shown that there exists a consistent sentence of classical predicate calculus (CPC) that does not possess a recursive model. The sentence is a conjunction of the axioms of a variant of Bernays set theory, including the axiom of infinity. The language contains additional constants besides ϵ. Later Kreisel [2] and Mostowski [3] presented a sentence (not possessing recursive models) which was a conjunction of axioms of a variant of Bernays set theory without the axiom of infinity but still with additional constants besides ϵ. Later Mostowski [4] improved the result by giving a sentence which can be demonstrated in Heyting arithmetic to be consistent and to have no recursive models. Rabin [6] obtained a simple proof that some sentence of set theory with the single nonlogical constant ϵ does not have any recursively enumerable models.

More generally, Mostowski [5] has shown that the set of all sentences valid in all RE models is not arithmetical and Vaught [1] improved this result by showing that it holds for a language of one binary relation. In fact, Vaught gives· a way of translating n-place relations to 2-place ones that preserves the RE characteristic of the model. For further results pertaining to recursive models see Vaught [1].

Let {We}e∈ω be a standard enumeration of the recursively enumerable (r.e.) subsets of ω = {0,1,2,…}. The lattice of recursively enumerable sets, , is the structure ({We}e∈ω,∪,∩). ≡ is a congruence relation on if ≡ is an equivalence relation on and if for all U, U′ ∈ and V, V′ ∈ , if U ≡ U′ and V ≡ V′, then U ∪ V ≡ U′ ∪ V′ and U ∩ V ≡ U′ ∩ V′. [U] = {V ∈ | V ≡ U} is the equivalence class of U. If ≡ is a congruence relation on , the elements of the quotient lattice / ≡ are the equivalence classes of ≡. [U] ∪ [V] is defined as [U ∪ V], and [U] ∩ [V] is defined as [U ∩ V]. We say that a congruence relation ≡ on is if {(i, j)| Wi ≡ Wj} is . Define =* by putting Wi, =* Wj if and only if (Wi − Wj)∪ (Wj − Wi) is finite. Then =* is a congruence relation. If D is any set, then we can define a congruence relation by putting Wi Wj if and only if Wi ∩ D =* Wj ∩D. By Hammond [2], a congruence relation ≡ ⊇ =* is if and only if ≡ is equal to for some set D.

The Friedberg splitting theorem [1] asserts that if A is any recursively enumerable set, then there exist disjoint recursively enumerable sets A0 and A1 such that A = A0∪ A1 and such that for any recursively enumerable set B

This is really a note to Wajsberg's [4].

In [3] J. C. C. McKinsey proved the following two completeness theorems: (1) theorem 6: If A is a wff of S2 with just r (proper or improper) sub-wffs, then A is provable in S2 iff A is satisfied by every normal S2-matrix with no more than 22r+1 elements; (2) theorem 13: if A is a wff of S4 with just r sub-wffs, then A is provable in S4 iff A is satisfied by every normal S4-matrix with no more than 22r elements. Now, a similar theorem has not been explicitly formulated for S5, even though a similar, even simpler, theorem has been almost at hand since Wajsberg's [4] was published in 1933, namely:

Theorem. If A is a wff of S5 with just n propositional variables, then A is provable in S5 iff A is satisfied by a normal SS-matrix with 22n elements.

The present report is a, somewhat lengthy, addendum to [4], where the elimination of cuts from derivations in sequent calculus for classical logic was studied ‘from the point of view of linear logic’. To that purpose a formulation of classical logic was used, that - as in linear logic - distinguishes between multiplicative and additive versions of the binary connectives.

The main novelty here is the observation that this type-distinction is not essential: we can allow classical sequent derivations to use any combination of additive and multiplicative introduction rules for each of the connectives, and still have strong normalization and confluence of tq-reductions.

We give a detailed description of the simulation of tq-reductions by means of reductions of the interpretation of any given classical proof as a proof net of PN2 (the system of second order proof nets for linear logic), in which moreover all connectives can be taken to be of one type, e.g., multiplicative.

We finally observe that dynamically the different logical cuts, as determined by the four possible combinations of introduction rules, are independent: it is not possible to simulate them internally, i.e.. by only one specific combination, and structural rules.

The purpose of this paper is to show that arithmetically minimal systems of notations can be constructed which provide notations for all ramified analytical ordinals (all the ordinals in the minimum β-model for analysis). This is a much larger section of the second number class than the Church-Kleene constructive ordinals (although still only an initial segment of the ordinals). Arithmetic minimality means that if H is an “H-set” associated with an ordinal α in our system and H′ is an H-set associated with the same ordinal α in an arbitrary system of notations S, then H is arithmetical in H′. Thus the arithmetical degrees associated with ordinals in our system are as low as possible.

In order to clarify the structure of degrees of unsolvability and, more generally, to gain a deeper insight into the power set of the integers, coarser but neater classifications than the structure of Turing degrees have been sought. Several hierarchies of sets of integers have been studied, each of which organizes a certain class of sets (or their degrees of unsolvability) into a well-ordering of levels with increasing complexity of nonrecursiveness appearing at each new level. The best known of these hierarchies is the Kleene hierarchy of arithmetical sets.

In this note I construct a proper o-minimal expansion of the ordered additive group of rationals.

Let T be a countable, complete, ω-stable, nonmultidimensional theory. By Lascar [7], in Teq there is in every dimension of T a type with Lascar rank ωα for some α. We give sufficient conditions for α to coincide with the level of that dimension in Pillay's [10] RK-hierarchy of dimensions computed in Teq. In particular, this is fulfilled for modules.

The lambda calculus was conceived by Church, and to some extent by Curry (see [1] and [2]), as a general theory of functions, more precisely as a formalization of two basic functional concepts: application and abstraction. This claim to universality was impossible to maintain, for it soon became apparent that functions in the calculus are required to have properties which are by no means universal. Self-application is certainly a very special feature, but more relevant from our point of view is the existence of fixed points, which is definitely a nonuniversal property of functions. This situation was not ignored, but was considered rather as a form of inconsistency very much related to the paradoxes of set theory (for example, see the discussion of the paradoxical combinator in [2]).

More recently, the lambda calculus has been studied by people in computer science, and as a result the algorithmic nature of the system has been more explicitly recognized. Eventually, the right approach was taken by D. Scott (see [4] and [5]) who restricted the objects of the calculus to continuous functionals over complete lattices, which can be combined in structures where application and abstraction are properly interpreted. It soon became clear that complete lattices were not necessary, and more general structures were introduced. On the other hand the requirement of continuity was essential for the construction, and has remained a basic feature. It is one of the purposes of this paper to show that in the general situation continuity can be replaced by monotonicity.

The work of Scott was extended by Wadsworth [6], who gave a precise formulation of the operational semantics, and proved the equivalence to Scott's interpretation.

The inverse of the distance between two structures ≢ of finite type τ is naturally measured by the smallest integer q such that a sentence of quantifier rank q − 1 is satisfied by but not by . In this way the space Strτ of structures of type τ is equipped with a pseudometric. The induced topology coincides with the elementary topology of Strτ. Using the rudiments of the theory of uniform spaces, in this elementary note we prove the convergence of every Cauchy net of structures, for any type τ.