A well-known result of Vaught's is that no complete theory has exactly two nonisomorphic countable models. The main result of this paper is that there is a complete decidable theory with exactly two nonisomorphic decidable models.

A model is decidable if it has a decidable satisfaction predicate. To be more precise, let T be a decidable theory, let {θn∣n < ω} be an effective enumeration of all formulas in L(T), and let be a countable model of T. For any indexing E = {ai∣ i < ω} of ∣∣, and any formula ϕ ∈ L(T), let ‘ϕE’ denote the result of substituting ‘ai’ for every free occurrence of ‘xi’ in ϕ, i < ω. Then is decidable just in case, for some indexing E of ∣∣, {n ∣ ⊨ θnE} is a recursive set of integers. It is easy to show that the decidability of a model does not depend on the choice of the effective enumeration of the formulas in L(T); we omit details. By a simple ‘effectivization’ of Henkin's proof of the completeness theorem (see Chang [1]) we have

Fact 1. Every decidable consistent theory has a decidable model.

Assume next that T is a complete decidable theory and {θn ∣ n < ω} is an effective enumeration of all formulas of L(T).

Spaces of orderings provide an abstract framework in which to study spaces of orderings of formally real fields. Spaces of orderings of finite chain length are well understood [9, 11]. The Isotropy Theorem [11] and the extension of the Isotropy Theorem given in [13] are the main tools for reducing questions to the finite case, and these are quite effective. At the same time, there are many questions which do not appear to reduce in this way. In this paper we consider four such questions, for a space of orderings (X, G).

1. Is it true that every positive primitive formula P(a) with parameters a in G which holds in every finite subspace of (X, G) necessarily holds in (X, G)?

2. If f: X → ℤ is continuous and Σx∈Vf(x) ≡ 0 mod ∣V∣ holds for all fans V in X with ∣V∣ ≤ 2n, does there exist a form ϕ with entries in G such that mod Cont(X, 2nℤ)?

3. Is it true that Cont(X, 2nℤ) ∩ Witt(X, G) = In(X, G), where I(X, G) denotes the fundamental ideal?

4. Is the separating depth of a constructible set C in X necessarily bounded by the stability index of (X, G)?

The unexplained terminology and notation is explained later in the main body of the paper. In a certain sense Question 1 is the main question. At the same time, Questions 2, 3 and 4 are of considerable interest, both from the point of view of quadratic form theory and from the point of view of real algebraic geometry.

The Guarded Negation Fragment (GNFO) is a fragment of first-order logic that contains all positive existential formulas, can express the first-order translations of basic modal logic and of many description logics, along with many sentences that arise in databases. It has been shown that the syntax of GNFO is restrictive enough so that computational problems such as validity and satisfiability are still decidable. This suggests that, in spite of its expressive power, GNFO formulas are amenable to novel optimizations. In this article we study the model theory of GNFO formulas. Our results include effective preservation theorems for GNFO, effective Craig Interpolation and Beth Definability results, and the ability to express the certain answers of queries with respect to a large class of GNFO sentences within very restricted logics.

Using methods from computable analysis, we establish a new connection between two seemingly distant areas of logic: computable structure theory and invariant descriptive set theory. We extend several fundamental results of computable structure theory to the more general setting of topological group actions. As we will see, the usual action of ${S_\infty }$ on the space of structures in a given language is effective in a certain algorithmic sense that we need, and ${S_\infty }$ itself carries a natural computability structure (to be defined). Among other results, we give a sufficient condition for an orbit under effective ${\cal G}$-action of a computable Polish ${\cal G}$ to split into infinitely many disjoint effective orbits. Our results are not only more general than the respective results in computable structure theory, but they also tend to have proofs different from (and sometimes simpler than) the previously known proofs of the respective prototype results.

Nonstandard set theory is an attempt to generalise nonstandard analysis to cover the whole of classical mathematics. Existing versions (Nelson, Hrbáček, Kawai) are unsatisfactory in that the unlimited idealisation principle conflicts with the wish to have a full theory of external sets.

I re-analyse the underlying requirements of nonstandard set theory and give a new formal system, stratified nonstandard set theory, which seems to meet them better than the other versions.

An implication A ⊃ B is said to be null in case A is false in all instances. This note describes several formal systems for first-order predicate logic and arithmetic in which null implications do not occur. In fact, the most restrictive systems avoid the occurrences of any formulas which represent null predicates. The precise sense of this avoidance is explained below.

An intuitionistic negation is a statement of the form A ⊃ F where F is a contradiction. The absence of null implications among true statements entails the absence of intuitionistic negations, and hence systems described here might be called negationless intuitionistic systems.

For a set x, let ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ be the set of all permutations of x. We prove in ZF (without the axiom of choice) several results concerning this notion, among which are the following:

(1) For all sets x such that ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ is Dedekind infinite, $\left| {{{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left( x \right)} \right| < \left| {{\cal S}\left( x \right)} \right|$ and there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ into ${{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left( x \right)$, where ${{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left( x \right)$ denotes the set of all permutations of x which move only finitely many elements.

(2) For all sets x such that ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ is Dedekind infinite, $\left| {{\rm{seq}}\left( x \right)} \right| < \left| {{\cal S}\left( x \right)} \right|$ and there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ into seq (x), where seq (x) denotes the set of all finite sequences of elements of x.

(3) For all infinite sets x such that there exists a permutation of x without fixed points, there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left( x \right)$ into x.

(4) For all sets x, $|{[x]^2}| < \left| {{\cal S}\left( x \right)} \right|$.

The Infinite Time Turing Machine model [8] of Hamkins and Kidder is, in an essential sense, a “Σ2-machine” in that it uses a Σ2Liminf Rule to determine cell values at limit stages of time. We give a generalisation of these machines with an appropriate Σn rule. Such machines either halt or enter an infinite loop by stage , again generalising precisely the ITTM case.

The collection of such machines taken together computes precisely those reals of the least model of analysis.

We study the fragment of Peano arithmetic formalizing the induction principle for the class of decidable predicates, IΔ1. We show that IΔ1 is independent from the set of all true arithmetical Π2-sentences. Moreover, we establish the connections between this theory and some classes of oracle computable functions with restrictions on the allowed number of queries. We also obtain some conservation and independence results for parameter free and inference rule forms of Δ1-induction.

An open problem formulated by J. Paris (see [4, 5]) is whether IΔ1 proves the corresponding least element principle for decidable predicates, LΔ1 (or, equivalently, the Σ1-collection principle BΣ1). We reduce this question to a purely computation-theoretic one.

An old conjecture of modal logics states that every splitting of the major systems K4, S4, G and Grz has the finite model property. In this paper we will prove that all iterated splittings of G have fmp, whereas in the other cases we will give explicit counterexamples. We also introduce a proof technique which will give a positive answer for large classes of splitting frames. The proof works by establishing a rather strong property of these splitting frames namely that they preserve the finite model property in the following sense. Whenever an extension Λ has fmp so does the splitting Λ/f of Λ by f. Although we will also see that this method has its limitations because there are frames lacking this property, it has several desirable side effects. For example, properties such as compactness, decidability and others can be shown to be preserved in a similar way and effective bounds for the size of models can be given. Moreover, all methods and proofs are constructive.

We give a complete description of minimal groups infinitely definable in separably closed fields of finite degree of imperfection. In particular we answer positively the question of the existence of such a group with infinite transcendence degree (i.e., a minimal group with non thin generic).

In this article we give a forcing characterization for the Ramsey property of -Sets of reals. This research was motivated by the well-known forcing characterizations for Lebesgue measurability and the Baire property of -sets of reals. Further we will show the relationship between higher degrees of forcing absoluteness and the Ramsey property of projective sets of reals.

It has been known for some time that there is a primitive recursive permutation of the nonnegative integers whose inverse is recursive but not primitive recursive. For example one has this result apparently for the first time in Kuznecov [1] and implicitly in Kent [2] or J. Robinson [3], who shows that every singularly recursive function ƒ is representable as

where A, B, C are primitive recursive and B is a permutation.

The uniform halting problem (UH) can be stated as follows:

Give a decision procedure which for any given Turing machine (TM) will decide whether or not it has an immortal instantaneous description (ID).

An ID is called immortal if it has no terminal successor. As it is generally the case in the literature (see e.g. Minsky [4, p. 118]) we assume that in an ID the tape must be blank except for some finite number of squares. If we remove this restriction the UH becomes the immortality problem (IP).

In [11] the constructive ordinals were extended to constructive finite number classes by using systems of notations where mappings at limit ordinals are just partial recursive functions. It turned out that these systems are equivalent, both in terms of ordinals represented and the forms of the sets of notations, to extensions obtained by using mappings at limit ordinals which are partial recursive in (sets of notations for) previously defined number classes. In this article these results are extended to constructive transfinite number classes. We present a system (F, ||) which, in terms of our analogy with the classical ordinals, provides notations for the ordinals less than the first “constructively inaccessible” ordinal, and show that the above equivalence holds at least this far.

In [1], Anscombe and Koenigsmann give an existential ∅-definition of the ring of formal power series F[[t]] in its quotient field in the case where F is finite. We extend their method in several directions to give general definability results for henselian valued fields with finite or pseudo-algebraically closed residue fields.

The notion of a variable restricted in range to some set of values, or to values having some property, is widespread in logic and mathematics. To avoid continual explicit mention of such a restriction the common device is to resort to a typographically different set of letters for such variables. But a notation of this kind is clearly inadequate when a general discussion, including more than one kind of restriction, is under consideration. For example, two restrictions may have some inner connection, as in the case of mutually exclusive restrictions, and this the usual symbolism doesn't depict; or, one may wish to study the dependence of such restrictions upon one or more parameters as in the case of bounded quantifiers of recursive function theory; or, one can even conceive of restrictions which may in turn depend upon restricted variables. In each of these cases the currently used notation is deficient.

If x is an individual-variable and Q a formula of the predicate calculus, then for the idea ‘x such that Q’ the notation ‘vxQ’ is proposed as one having the requisite degree of notational multiplicity – the ‘vx’ acting as a binding operator for free occurrences of x in Q. The expression ‘vxQ’ is referred to as a restricted-variable and it may occupy positions in formulas appropriate to individual-variables, in argument places as well as in quantifiers. In § 2 a first-level predicate calculus, called ‘‘, is presented in which the restricted-variable is an integral part.

In this paper we consider classes of finite structures where we have good control over the sizes of the definable sets. The motivating example is the class of finite fields: it was shown in [1] that for any formula in the language of rings, there are finitely many pairs (d, μ) ∈ ω × Q>0 so that in any finite field F and for any ā ∈ Fm the size |ø(Fn,ā)| is “approximately” μ|F|d. Essentially this is a generalisation of the classical Lang-Weil estimates from the category of varieties to that of the first-order-definable sets.

One of this author's favorite theorems has long been the Zero-One law discovered independently by Glebskii et al. [12] and Ron Fagin [10]. Let A be any first-order property of graphs and let µn(A) be the proportion of labelled graphs on n vertices for which A holds. Then

This result has inspired much work by logicians, generally in the direction of showing (1) for some powerful languages. Thus it is known [5] that (1) holds when A is a sentence in fixed point logic and it is known [13] that (1) does not always hold when A is a sentence in second-order monadic logic. Here, however, we explore recent work in a totally different direction. Let G(n, p) denote the random graph on n vertices with edge probability p. (In §2 we define the random structures we will deal with.) A property A is an event in the probability space and Pr[G(n, p) ╞ A] is well defined. When p = 1/2, each labelled graph on n vertices has equal weight so that (1) may be rewritten

Fagin's proof actually gives that (2) holds for any constant 0 < p < 1.

A standard enumeration of the recursively enumerable (r.e.) sets is an acceptable numbering {Wn}n∈N of the r.e. sets in the sense of Rogers [5, p. 41], together with a 1:1 recursive function f with range In his quest for nonrecursive incomplete r.e. sets Post [4] constructed a hypersimple set Hf, relative to a fixed but unspecified standard enumeration f. Although it was later shown that hyper-simplicity does not guarantee incompleteness, the ironic possibility remained that Post's own particular hypersimple set might be incomplete. We settle the question by proving that H, may be either complete or incomplete depending upon which standard enumeration f is used. In contrast, D. A. Martin has shown [3] that Post's simple set S [4, p. 298] is complete for any standard enumeration. Furthermore, what most modern recursion theorists would regard as the “natural” construction of a hypersimple set (which we give in §1) is also complete for any standard enumeration.

There are two conclusions to be drawn from these results. First, they substantiate the often repeated remark among recursion theorists that Post's hypersimple set construction is a precursor of priority constructions because priorities play a strong role, and because there is a great deal of “restraint” which tends to keep elements out of the set. Secondly, the results warn recursion theorists that more properties than might have been supposed depend upon which standard enumeration is chosen at the beginning of the construction of some r.e. set.