We investigate the partial orderings of the form P(X),⊂〉,where X is a relational structure and P(X) the set of the domains of itsisomorphic substructures. A rough classification of countable binary structurescorresponding to the forcing-related properties of the posets of their copies isobtained.

In [60] N. Belnap presented an 8-element matrix for the relevant logic R with the following property: if in an implication A → B the formulas A and B do not have a common variable then there exists a valuation v such that v (A → B) does not belong to the set of designated elements of this matrix. A 6-element matrix of this kind can be found in: R. Routley, R.K. Meyer, V. Plumwood and R.T. Brady [82], Below we prove that the logics generated by these two matrices are the only maximal extensions of the relevant logic R which have the relevance property: if A → B is provable in such a logic then A and B have a common propositional variable.

Morley rank and Lascar rank are equal on generic types of definable groups in differentially closed fields with finitely many commuting derivations.

A Turing degree d is the degree of categoricity of a computable structure ${\cal S}$ if d is the least degree capable of computing isomorphisms among arbitrary computable copies of ${\cal S}$. A degree d is the strong degree of categoricity of ${\cal S}$ if d is the degree of categoricity of ${\cal S}$, and there are computable copies ${\cal A}$ and ${\cal B}$ of ${\cal S}$ such that every isomorphism from ${\cal A}$ onto ${\cal B}$ computes d. In this paper, we build a c.e. degree d and a computable rigid structure ${\cal M}$ such that d is the degree of categoricity of ${\cal M}$, but d is not the strong degree of categoricity of ${\cal M}$. This solves the open problem of Fokina, Kalimullin, and Miller [13].

For a computable structure ${\cal S}$, we introduce the notion of the spectral dimension of ${\cal S}$, which gives a quantitative characteristic of the degree of categoricity of ${\cal S}$. We prove that for a nonzero natural number N, there is a computable rigid structure ${\cal M}$ such that $0\prime$ is the degree of categoricity of ${\cal M}$, and the spectral dimension of ${\cal M}$ is equal to N.

We use axioms of abstract ternary relations to define the notion of a free amalgamation theory. These form a subclass of first-order theories, without the strict order property, encompassing many prominent examples of countable structures in relational languages, in which the class of algebraically closed substructures is closed under free amalgamation. We show that any free amalgamation theory has elimination of hyperimaginaries and weak elimination of imaginaries. With this result, we use several families of well-known homogeneous structures to give new examples of rosy theories. We then prove that, for free amalgamation theories, simplicity coincides with NTP2 and, assuming modularity, with NSOP3 as well. We also show that any simple free amalgamation theory is 1-based. Finally, we prove a combinatorial characterization of simplicity for Fraïssé limits with free amalgamation, which provides new context for the fact that the generic K n -free graphs are SOP3, while the higher arity generic $K_n^r$ -free r-hypergraphs are simple.

We define the notion of generic for an arbitrary subgroup H of a stable group, and show that H has a definable hull with the same generic properties. We then apply this to the theory of stable fields.

Let us say that a geometric theory T is of presheaf type if its classifying topos is (equivalent to) a presheaf topos. (We adhere to the convention that geometric logic allows arbitrary disjunctions, while coherent logic means geometric and finitary.) Write Mod(T) for the category of Set-models and homomorphisms of T. The next proposition is well known; see, for example, MacLane–Moerdijk [13], pp. 381-386, and the textbook of Adámek–Rosický [1] for additional information:

Proposition 0.1. For a category , the following properties are equivalent:

(i) is a finitely accessible category in the sense of Makkai–Paré [14], i.e., it has filtered colimits and a small dense subcategory of finitely presentable objects

ii) is equivalent to Pts, the category of points of some presheaf topos

(iii) is equivalent to the free filtered cocompletion (also known as Ind-) of a small category .

(iv) is equivalent to Mod(T) for some geometric theory of presheaf type.

Moreover, if these are satisfied for a given , then the —in any of (i), (ii) and (iii)—can be taken to be the full subcategory of consisting of finitely presentable objects. (There may be inequivalent choices of , as it is in general only determined up to idempotent completion; this will not concern us.)

This seems to completely solve the problem of identifying when T is of presheaf type: check whether Mod(T) is finitely accessible and if so, recover the presheaf topos as Set-functors on the full subcategory of finitely presentable models. There is a subtlety here, however, as pointed out (probably for the first time) by Johnstone [10].

The sign ‘⊃’ (or ‘→’ or ‘C’) functions in many logical systems in a way which precludes its interpretation as either strict or material implication. For example, in the systems of Heyting, Johansson, Fitch and Bernays (positive logic), the following are theorems:

Now if ‘⊃’ were interpreted as strict implication, ⊃2 would mean ‘if p is true, then p is strictly implied by every proposition’, i.e. ‘if p is true, it is necessarily true’, which is false for contingently true p. If on the other hand ‘⊃’ were interpreted as material implication, ⊃1 would reduce to ‘~p ∨ p’, i.e. to the law of excluded middle, which is conspicuously lacking in the systems mentioned. The reader is likely in practice to veer between these two interpretations. Thus in Fitch or Heyting on realizing that ‘~p⊃▪ p⊃q’ is a theorem, one thinks of it as meaning ‘a false proposition implies everything’ and regards the implication as material; but the presence of ‘p⊃p’ as a theorem, even for choices of p which do not satisfy excluded middle, inclines one again to the strict interpretation. This vacillation, while it need not lead to the commission of any formal fallacies, tends to hamstring one's intuition and thus waste time. The purpose of this paper is to suggest an interpretation of ‘⊃’ which will prevent such havering.

Let two formulae A and B be called interdeducible if A ⊢ B and B ⊢ A.

Einleitung. Das “Auswahlaxiom” oder “multiplicative axiom” fordert in der gewöhnlichen, von B. Russell und Zermelo angegebenen Fassung, daß zu jeder Menge M, deren Elemente paarweise fremde und nicht-leere Mengen sind, mindestens eine “Auswahlmenge” existiere, die mit jedem Element von M genau éin Element gemeinsam hat. Die nächstliegende und mehrfach verwendete Methode, um ein schwächeres Postulat als die vorstehende Fassung zu formulieren, besteht darin, daß man entweder über die Mächtigkeit der Menge M, oder über die Mächtigkeiten ihrer Elemente, oder über beides gleichzeitig, einschränkende Bedingungen macht, also nur in diesen eingeschränkten Fällen die Existenz einer Auswahlmenge verlangt. Hinsichtlich der Mächtigkeit von M ist da sogleich die Bemerkung zu machen, daß sie jedenfalls transfinit (genauer: nicht endlich im induktiven Sinn) anzusetzen ist. Vermöge allgemeiner logischer Sachverhalte und des (eventuell zu beweisenden) Prinzips, das zu einem gegebenen Objekt a die Bildung der Menge {a} erlaubt, ist nämlich die Existenz einer Auswahlmenge von M beweisbar, falls M die Mächtigkeit 1 besitzt, und diese Beweisbarkeit überträgt sich mittels gewöhnlicher Induktion auf den Fall einer beliebigen endlichen Mächtigkeit. Dagegen ist die Existenz einer Auswahlmenge nicht mehr beweisbar, wenn (bei transfinitem M) die Elemente von M endliche Mengen mit Mächtigkeiten > 1 sind, z. B. also schon in dem Fall, wo M eine transfinite Menge von Paaren ist—natürlich “im allgemeinen,” d. h. wenn die Elemente von M nicht eine besondere Beschaffenheit haben, die die Auszeichnung gewisser Elemente in ihnen ermöglicht. Die Tatsache dieser Nichtbeweisbarkeit, d. h. der Unabhängigkeit des Auswahlaxioms sogar in diesem einfachsten Fall, ist vor längerer Zeit auf der Basis des Zermeloschen Axiomensystems der Mengenlehre nachgewiesen worden.

Alonzo Church has proposed a system of “restricted recursive arithmetic” for the analysis of computer circuits which include time delays and feedback. Restricted recursive arithmetic, which will be referred to as rra, was introduced by Church in this Journal, vol. 20 (1955), pp. 286–287, in a review of an article by Edmund C. Berkeley. It is the purpose of this paper to present some results which have been found for the system rra.

This paper continues investigations of the monotone fixed point principle in the context of Feferman's explicit mathematics begun in [14]. Explicit mathematics is a versatile formal framework for representing Bishop-style constructive mathematics and generalized recursion theory. The object of investigation here is the theory of explicit mathematics augmented by the monotone fixed point principle, which asserts that any monotone operation on classifications (Feferman's notion of set) possesses a least fixed point. To be more precise, the new axiom not merely postulates the existence of a least solution, but, by adjoining a new constant to the language, it is ensured that a fixed point is uniformly presentable as a function of the monotone operation. Let T0 + UMID denote this extension of explicit mathematics. [14] gave lower bounds for the strength of two subtheories of To + UMID in relating them to fragments of second order arithmetic based on comprehension. [14] showed that To ↾ + UMID and To ↾ + INDk + UMID have at least the strength of ( – CA), and ↾ and – CA), respectively.

Here we are concerned with the exact reversals. Let UMIDN be the monotone fixed-point principle for subclassifications of the natural numbers. Among other results, it is shown that To ↾ + UMIDN and To ↾ + INDN + UMIDN have the same strength as ( – CA) ↾ and ( – CA), respectively.

The results are achieved by constructing set-theoretic models for the aforementioned systems of explicit mathematics in certain extensions of Kripke-Platek set theory and subsequently relating these set theories to subsystems of second arithmetic.

In this paper we continue the study of the structure of the lattice of recursively enumerable (r.e.) open subsets of a topological space. Work in this approach to effective topology began in Kalantari and Retzlaff [5] and continued in Kalantari [2], Kalantari and Leggett [3] and Kalantari and Remmel [4]. Studies in effectiveness of results in structures other than integers began with the work of Specker [17] and Lacombe [8] on effective analysis.

The renewed activity in the study of the effective content of mathematical structures owes much to Nerode's program and Metakides' and Nerode's [11], [12] work on vector spaces and fields. These studies have been extended by Kalantari, Remmel, Retzlaff, Shore and Smith. Similar studies on the effective content of other mathematical structures have been conducted. These include work on topological vector spaces, boolean algebras, linear orderings etc.

Kalantari and Retzlaff [5] began a study of effective topological spaces by considering a topological space with a countable basis ⊿ for the topology. The space X is to be fully effective; that is, the basis elements are coded into ω and the operations of intersection of basis elements and the relation of inclusion among them are both computable. An r.e. open subset of X is then represented as the union of basic open sets whose codes lie in an r.e. subset of ω.

We consider reducts of the structure ℛ = 〈ℝ, +, ·, <〉 and other real closed fields. We compete the proof that there exists a unique reduct between 〈ℝ, +, <,λa〉a ∈ ℝ and ℛ, and we demonstrate how to recover the definition of multiplication in more general contexts than the semialgebraic one. We then conclude a similar result for reducts between 〈ℝ, ·, <〉 and ℛ and for general real closed fields.

Predicate-functor logic, as founded by W. V. Quine ([1960], [1971], [1976], [1981]), is first-order predicate logic without individual variables. Instead, adverbs or predicate functors make explicit the permutations and replications of argument-places familiarly indicated by shifting variables about. For the history of this approach, see Quine [1971, 309ff.]. With the evaporation of variables, individual constants naturally assimilate to singleton predicates or adverbs, leaving no logical subjects whatever of type 0. The orphaned “predicates” may then be taken simply as terms in the sense of traditional logic: class and relational terms on model-theoretic semantics, schematic terms on Quine's denotational or truth-of semantics. Predicate-functor logic thus stands forth as the pre-eminent first-order term logic, as distinct from propositional-quantificational logic. By the same token, it might with some justification qualify as “first-order combinatory logic”, with allowance for some categorization of the sort eschewed in general combinatory logic, the ultimate term logic.

Over the years, Quine has put forward various choices of primitive predicate functors for first-order logic with or without the full theory of identity. Moreover, he has provided translations of quantificational into predicate-functor notation and vice versa ([1971, 312f.], [1981, 651]). Such a translation does not of itself establish semantic completeness, however, in the absence of a proof that it preserves deducibility.

An axiomatization of predicate-functor logic was first published by Kuhn [1980], using primitives rather like Quine's. As Kuhn noted, “The axioms and rules have been chosen to facilitate the completeness proof” [1980, 153]. While this expedient simplifies the proof, however, it limits the depth of analysis afforded by the axioms and rules. Mindful of this problem, Kuhn ([1981] and [1983]) boils his axiom system down considerably, correcting certain minor slips in the original paper.

We prove a number of results about countable Borel equivalence relations with forcing constructions and arguments. These results reveal hidden regularity properties of Borel complete sections on certain orbits. As consequences they imply the nonexistence of Borel complete sections with certain features.

A definition is given for formulae A1, …, An in some theory T which is formalized in a propositional calculus S to be (in)dependent with respect to S. It is shown that, for intuitionistic propositional logic IPC, dependency (with respect to IPC itself) is decidable. This is an almost immediate consequence of Pitts’ uniform interpolation theorem for IPC. A reasonably simple infinite sequence of IPC-formulae Fn (p, q) is given such that IPC-formulae A and B are dependent if and only if at least on of the Fn (A, B) is provable.

The notion of ∀-recursiviness, introduced by Lacombe [1], is intended to describe the effectively definable functions and predicates in abstract structures with equality and denumerable domains. The fact that on every such structure ∀-recursiviness and search computability are equivalent is proved by Moschovakis in [2].

The definition of search computability [3] does not require the presence of the equality among the basic predicates of the structure. There exist abstract structures where the equality is not search-computable and even not semicomputable. On the other hand, in some structures the equality is not an “effective” predicate. Consider, for example, a structure whose domain consists of all partial recursive functions.

A notion of relative computability in abstract structures with denumerable domains, which we shall call here ∀-admissibility, was introduced by D. Skordev in 1977. The notion of ∀-admissibility is a generalization of Lacombe's ∀-recursiviness and does not require the presence of the equality among the basic predicates. In 1977 Skordev conjectured that, in every partial structure with denumerable domain, ∀-admissibility and search computability are equivalent.

Since 1977 some attempts have been made to establish Skordev's conjecture. It is proved in [4] for structures with total basic functions and without basic predicates, and in [5] for structures with finite domains. The proofs in [4] and [5] make use of the priority method and are very complicated.

The paper proves a conjecture of Solomon Feferman concerning the indefiniteness of the continuum hypothesis relative to a semi-intuitionistic set theory.

We give strengthened versions of the Herwig–Lascar and Hodkinson–Otto extension theorems for partial automorphisms of finite structures. Such strengthenings yield several combinatorial and group-theoretic consequences for homogeneous structures. For instance, we establish a coherent form of the extension property for partial automorphisms for certain Fraïssé classes. We deduce from these results that the isometry group of the rational Urysohn space, the automorphism group of the Fraïssé limit of any Fraïssé class that is the class of all ${\cal F}$-free structures (in the Herwig–Lascar sense), and the automorphism group of any free homogeneous structure over a finite relational language all contain a dense locally finite subgroup. We also show that any free homogeneous structure admits ample generics.