Propositional proof complexity is the study of the sizes of propositional proofs, and more generally, the resources necessary to certify propositional tautologies. Questions about proof sizes have connections with computational complexity, theories of arithmetic, and satisfiability algorithms. This is article includes a broad survey of the field, and a technical exposition of some recently developed techniques for proving lower bounds on proof sizes.

Two ways of describing a group are considered. 1. A group is finite-automaton presentable if its elements can be represented by strings over a finite alphabet, in such a way that the set of representing strings and the group operation can be recognized by finite automata. 2. An infinite f.g. group is quasi-finitely axiomatizable if there is a description consisting of a single first-order sentence, together with the information that the group is finitely generated. In the first part of the paper we survey examples of FA-presentable groups, but also discuss theorems restricting this class. In the second part, we give examples of quasi-finitely axiomatizable groups, consider the algebraic content of the notion, and compare it to the notion of a group which is a prime model. We also show that if a structure is bi-interpretable in parameters with the ring of integers, then it is prime and quasi-finitely axiomatizable.

Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) with his work on the constructible universe L established the relative consistency of the Axiom of Choice (AC) and the Continuum Hypothesis (CH). More broadly, he ensured the ascendancy of first-order logic as the framework and a matter of method for set theory and secured the cumulative hierarchy view of the universe of sets. Gödel thereby transformed set theory and launched it with structured subject matter and specific methods of proof. In later years Gödel worked on a variety of set theoretic constructions and speculated about how problems might be settled with new axioms. We here chronicle this development from the point of view of the evolution of set theory as a field of mathematics. Much has been written, of course, about Gödel's work in set theory, from textbook expositions to the introductory notes to his collected papers. The present account presents an integrated view of the historical and mathematical development as supported by his recently published lectures and correspondence. Beyond the surface of things we delve deeper into the mathematics. What emerges are the roots and anticipations in work of Russell and Hilbert, and most prominently the sustained motif of truth as formalizable in the “next higher system”. We especially work at bringing out how transforming Gödel's work was for set theory. It is difficult now to see what conceptual and technical distance Gödel had to cover and how dramatic his re-orientation of set theory was.

We survey the use of extra-set-theoretic hypotheses, mainly the continuum hypothesis, in the C*-algebra literature. The Calkin algebra emerges as a basic object of interest.

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem was published in Skolem's long paper of 1920, with the first section dedicated to the theorem. The second section of the paper contains a proof-theoretical analysis of derivations in lattice theory. The main result, otherwise believed to have been established in the late 1980s, was a polynomial-time decision algorithm for these derivations. Skolem did not develop any notation for the representation of derivations, which makes the proofs of his results hard to follow. Such a formal notation is given here by which these proofs become transparent. A third section of Skolem's paper gives an analysis for derivations in plane projective geometry. To clear a gap in Skolem's result, a new conservativity property is shown for projective geometry, to the effect that a proper use of the axiom that gives the uniqueness of connecting lines and intersection points requires a conclusion with proper cases (logically, a disjunction in a positive part) to be proved.

The forgotten parts of Skolem's first paper on the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem are the perhaps earliest combinatorial analyses of formal mathematical proofs, and at least the earliest analyses with profound results.

Full proofs of the Gödel incompleteness theorems are highly intricate affairs. Much of the intricacy lies in the details of setting up and checking the properties of a coding system representing the syntax of an object language (typically, that of arithmetic) within that same language. These details are seldom illuminating and tend to obscure the core of the argument. For this reason a number of efforts have been made to present the essentials of the proofs of Gödel's theorems without getting mired in syntactic or computational details. One of the most important of these efforts was made by Löb [8] in connection with his analysis of sentences asserting their own provability. Löb formulated three conditions (now known as the Hilbert-Bernays-Löb derivability conditions), on the provability predicate in a formal system which are jointly sufficient to yield the Gödel's second incompleteness theorem for it. A key role in Löb's analysis is played by (a special case of) what later became known as the diagonalization or fixed point property of formal systems, a property which had already, in essence, been exploited by Gödel in his original proofs of the incompleteness theorems. The fixed point property plays a central role in Lawvere's [7] category-theoretic account of incompleteness phenomena (see also [10]).

We show how to interpret the language of first-order set theory in an elementary topos endowed with, as extra structure, a directed structural system of inclusions (dssi). As our main result, we obtain a complete axiomatization of the intuitionistic set theory validated by all such interpretations. Since every elementary topos is equivalent to one carrying a dssi, we thus obtain a first-order set theory whose associated categories of sets are exactly the elementary toposes. In addition, we show that the full axiom of Separation is validated whenever the dssi is superdirected. This gives a uniform explanation for the known facts that cocomplete and realizability toposes provide models for Intuitionistic Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (IZF).

This is a survey paper on the descriptive set theory of hereditary families of closed sets in Polish spaces. Most of the paper is devoted to ideals and σ-ideals of closed or compact sets.

We present a characterization of supercompactness measures for ω1 in L(ℝ), and of countable products of such measures, using inner models. We give two applications of this characterization, the first obtaining the consistency of with ZFC+ADL(ℝ), and the second proving the uniqueness of the supercompactness measure over in L(ℝ) for .

There are Π5 formulas in the language of the Turing degrees, D, with ≤, ⋁ and ⋀, that define the relations x″ ≤ y″, x″ = y″ and so x ∈ L2(y) = {x ≥ y ∣ x″ = y″} in any jump ideal containing 0(ω). There are also Σ6 & Π6 and Π8 formulas that define the relations w = x″ and w = x′, respectively, in any such ideal I. In the language with just ≤ the quantifier complexity of each of these definitions increases by one. On the other hand, no Π2 or Σ2 formula in the language with just ≤ defines L2 or x ∈ L2(y). Our arguments and constructions are purely degree theoretic without any appeals to absoluteness considerations, set theoretic methods or coding of models of arithmetic. As a corollary, we see that every automorphism of I is fixed on every degree above 0″ and every relation on I that is invariant under double jump or joining with 0″ is definable over I if and only if it is definable in second order arithmetic with set quantification ranging over sets whose degrees are in I. Similar direct coding arguments show that every hyperjump ideal I is rigid and biinterpretable with second order arithmetic with set quantification ranging over sets with hyperdegrees in I. Analogous results hold for various coarser degree structures.

We introduce a nonstandard arithmetic NQA− based on the theory developed by R. Chuaqui and P. Suppes in [2] (we will denote it by NQA+), with a weakened external open minimization schema. A finitary consistency proof for NQA− formalizable in PRA is presented. We also show interesting facts about the strength of the theories NQA−and NQA+; NQA−is mutually interpretable with IΔ0 + EXP, and on the other hand, NQA+interprets the theories IΣ1 and WKL0.

§1. Introduction. A linear ordering (also known as total ordering) embeds into another linear ordering if it is isomorphic to a subset of it. Two linear orderings are said to be equimorphic if they can be embedded in each other. This is an equivalence relation, and we call the equivalence classes equimorphism types. We analyze the structure of equimorphism types of linear orderings, which is partially ordered by the embeddability relation. Our analysis is mainly fromthe viewpoints of Computability Theory and Reverse Mathematics. But we also obtain results, as the definition of equimorphism invariants for linear orderings, which provide a better understanding of the shape of this structure in general.

This study of linear orderings started by analyzing the proof-theoretic strength of a theorem due to Jullien [Jul69]. As is often the case in Reverse Mathematics, to solve this problem it was necessary to develop a deeper understanding of the objects involved. This led to a variety of results on the structure of linear orderings and the embeddability relation on them. These results can be divided into three groups.