SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2312.16650

Axiomatizability of hereditary classes of structures of finite and infinite languages and decidability of their universal theories

Abstract

In the paper hereditary classes of ${\rm L}$-structures are studied with language of the form ${{\rm L} = {\rm L_{fin}} \cup {\rm L_\infty}}$, where ${{\rm L_{fin}} = \langle R_1,R_2,\ldots, R_m, = \rangle}$ and ${{\rm L_\infty} = \langle R_{m+1}, R_{m+2}, \ldots \rangle}$, and also in ${\rm L_\infty}$ the number of predicates of each arity is finite, all predicates are ordered in ascending of their arities and satisfying the property of non-repetition of elements. A class of ${\rm L}$-structures is called hereditary if it is closed under substructures. It is proved that class of ${\rm L}$-structures is hereditary if and only if it can be defined in terms of forbidden substructures. A class of ${\rm L}$-structures is called universal axiomatizable if there is a set $Z$ of universal ${\rm L}$-sentences such that the class consists of all structures that satisfy $Z$. The problems of universal axiomatizability of hereditary classes of ${\rm L}$-structures are considered in the paper. It is shown that hereditary class of ${\rm L}$-structures is universal axiomatizable if and only if it can be defined in terms of finite forbidden substructures. It is proved that the universal theory of any axiomatizable hereditary class of ${\rm L}$-structures with recursive set of minimal forbidden substructures is decidable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Artem Ilev. 2023-12-27. Axiomatizability of hereditary classes of structures of finite and infinite languages and decidability of their universal theories. https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.16650

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