SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2511.10167

Positive Logic: An Introduction for Model Theorists

Abstract

Positive logic is a generalisation of full first-order logic that does not have negation built in. Still, many model-theoretic ideas, tools and techniques work perfectly fine in positive logic. Importantly, there is a compactness theorem. With some care, many classical results hold in the generality of positive logic without giving up any strength. In these self-contained notes we give an introduction to model theory in positive logic. We give a complete treatment of the basics of positive model theory and then we move on to deeper model-theoretic concepts. First, we discuss countable categoricity, where we work towards a theorem that characterises countably categorical positive theories. After that, we briefly discuss how the convenient formalism of monster models goes through in positive logic as usual. This is helpful in the remainder of the notes, where we discuss simple and stable theories. The main aim in those chapters is to develop dividing independence and prove Kim-Pillay style theorems. For a smoother treatment we assume thickness, which is the relatively mild assumption that being an indiscernible sequence is type-definable. We finish by discussing two big applications of positive logic: hyperimaginaries and continuous logic. For the former we define an $(-)^{\text{heq}}$ construction, analogous to the $(-)^{\text{eq}}$ construction for imaginaries in full first-order logic. Where the $(-)^{\text{heq}}$ construction is problematic in full first-order logic, it does stay within the framework in positive logic and it preserves many nice properties. For the latter we explain how continuous logic can be studied as a special case of positive logic, making it so that all abstract model-theoretic results in positive logic apply to continuous theories. In the appendix we provide a quick guide to the material covered in these notes, including very brief proof sketches.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Mark Kamsma. 2025-11-13. Positive Logic: An Introduction for Model Theorists. https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10167

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