SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1806.08500

On the relative strengths of fragments of collection

Abstract

Let $\mathbf{M}$ be the basic set theory that consists of the axioms of extensionality, emptyset, pair, union, powerset, infinity, transitive containment, $\Delta_0$-separation and set foundation. This paper studies the relative strength of set theories obtained by adding fragments of the set-theoretic collection scheme to $\mathbf{M}$. We focus on two common parameterisations of collection: $\Pi_n$-collection, which is the usual collection scheme restricted to $\Pi_n$-formulae, and strong $\Pi_n$-collection, which is equivalent to $\Pi_n$-collection plus $\Sigma_{n+1}$-separation. The main result of this paper shows that for all $n \geq 1$, (1) $\mathbf{M}+\Pi_{n+1}\textrm{-collection}+\Sigma_{n+2}\textrm{-induction on } \omega$ proves the consistency of Zermelo Set Theory plus $\Pi_{n}$-collection, (2) the theory $\mathbf{M}+\Pi_{n+1}\textrm{-collection}$ is $\Pi_{n+3}$-conservative over the theory $\mathbf{M}+\textrm{strong }\Pi_n \textrm{-collection}$. It is also shown that (2) holds for $n=0$ when the Axiom of Choice is included in the base theory. The final section indicates how the proofs of (1) and (2) can be modified to obtain analogues of these results for theories obtained by adding fragments of collection to a base theory (Kripke-Platek Set Theory with Infinity and $V=L$) that does not include the powerset axiom.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zachiri McKenzie. 2018-06-22. On the relative strengths of fragments of collection. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08500

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO