Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T09:18:28.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intermediate predicate logics determined by ordinals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Pierluigi Minari ,
Mitio Takano  and
Hiroakira Ono
Pierluigi Minari
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Florence, 50139 Firenze, Italy
Mitio Takano
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Niigata University, Niigata 950-21, Japan
Hiroakira Ono
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 730, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For each ordinal α > 0, L(α) is the intermediate predicate logic characterized by the class of all Kripke frames with the poset α and with constant domain. This paper will be devoted to a study of logics of the form L(α). It will be shown that for each uncountable ordinal of the form α + η with a finite or a countable η(> 0), there exists a countable ordinal of the form β + η such that L(α + η) = L(β + η). On the other hand, such a reduction of ordinals to countable ones is impossible for a logic L(α) if α is an uncountable regular ordinal. Moreover, it will be proved that the mapping L is injective if it is restricted to ordinals less than ωω, i.e. α ≠ β implies L(α) ≠ L(β) for each ordinal α, β ≤ ωω.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 1099 - 1124
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1990

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]van Benthem, J., Notes on modal definability, Notre Dante Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 30 (1989), pp. 20–35.Google Scholar
[2]Casari, E., Intermediate logics, Atti degli incontri di logica matematica 1982, Università di Siena (1983), pp. 243–298.Google Scholar
[3]Chagrov, A. V., On the complexity of propositional logics, Complexity problems in mathematical logic (Kanovich, M. I., editor), Kalininskiĭ Gosudarstvennyĭ Universitet, Kalinin, 1985, pp. 80–90. (Russian)Google Scholar
[4]van Dalen, D., lntuitionistic logic, Handbook of philosophical logic, Vol. III (Gabbay, D. and Guenthner, F., editors), Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986, pp. 225–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Hosoi, T. and Ono, H., Intermediate propositional logics (a survey), Journal of Tsuda College, vol. 5 (1973), pp. 67–82.Google Scholar
[6]Levy, A., Basic set theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Minari, P., Kripke-definable ordinals, Atti degli incontri di logica matematica, Università di Siena, vol. 2 (1985), pp. 185–188.Google Scholar
[8]Minari, P., A strong Löwenheim-Skolem-type theorem for Kripke semantic, unpublished.Google Scholar
[9]Ono, H., A study of intermediate predicate logics, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, vol. 8 (1972), pp. 619–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Ono, H., Some problems in intermediate predicate logics, Reports on Mathematical Logic, vol. 21 (1987), pp. 55–67.Google Scholar
[11]Ono, H., On finite linear intermediate predicate logics, Studia Logica, vol. 47 (1988), pp. 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Shehtman, V. B., Denumerable approximability of superintuitionistic and modal logics, Studies in nonclassical logics and formal systems (Mihaĭlov, A. I., editor), “Nauka”, Moscow, 1983, pp. 287–299. (Russian)Google Scholar
[13]Skvortsov, D. P., On axiomatizability of some intermediate predicate logics, Reports on Mathematical Logic, vol. 22 (1988), pp. 115–116. (summary)Google Scholar
[14]Takano, M., Ordered sets R and Q as bases of Kripke models, Studia Logica, vol. 46 (1987), pp. 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Takano, M., A negative answer to Ono's first problem: K-completeness does not imply strong K-completeness, Reports on Mathematical Logic, vol. 21 (1987), pp. 69–71.Google Scholar