We establish an equiconsistency between (1) weak indestructibility for all $\kappa +2$-degrees of strength for cardinals $\kappa $ in the presence of a proper class of strong cardinals, and (2) a proper class of cardinals that are strong reflecting strongs. We in fact get weak indestructibility for degrees of strength far beyond $\kappa +2$, well beyond the next inaccessible limit of measurables (of the ground model). One direction is proven using forcing and the other using core model techniques from inner model theory. Additionally, connections between weak indestructibility and the reflection properties associated with Woodin cardinals are discussed. This work is a part of my upcoming thesis [7].

We give a level-by-level analysis of the Weak Vopěnka Principle for definable classes of relational structures ( $\mathrm {WVP}$ ), in accordance with the complexity of their definition, and we determine the large-cardinal strength of each level. Thus, in particular, we show that $\mathrm {WVP}$ for $\Sigma _2$ -definable classes is equivalent to the existence of a strong cardinal. The main theorem (Theorem 5.11) shows, more generally, that $\mathrm {WVP}$ for $\Sigma _n$ -definable classes is equivalent to the existence of a $\Sigma _n$ -strong cardinal (Definition 5.1). Hence, $\mathrm {WVP}$ is equivalent to the existence of a $\Sigma _n$ -strong cardinal for all $n<\omega $ .

Starting from large cardinals we construct a model of ZFC in which the GCH fails everywhere, but such that GCH holds in its HOD. The result answers a question of Sy Friedman. Also, relative to the existence of large cardinals, we produce a model of ZFC + GCH such that GCH fails everywhere in its HOD.

We obtain an equiconsistency for a weak form of universal indestructibility for strongness. The equiconsistency is relative to a cardinal weaker in consistency strength than a Woodin cardinal, Stewart Baldwin's notion of hyperstrong cardinal. We also briefly indicate how our methods are applicable to universal indestructibility for supercompactness and strong compactness.

We summarize the known methods of producing a non-supercompact strongly compact cardinal and describe some new variants. Our Main Theorem shows how to apply these methods to many cardinals simultaneously and exactly control which cardinals are supercompact and which are only strongly compact in a forcing extension. Depending upon the method, the surviving non-supercompact strongly compact cardinals can be strong cardinals, have trivial Mitchell rank or even contain a club disjoint from the set of measurable cardinals. These results improve and unify Theorems 1 and 2 of [5], due to the first author.