arXiv subjects

Alfredo Roque Freire

Publications and source records attributed to Alfredo Roque Freire.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Regular non-normal modal classicalities

We present a novel investigation into the consistency operator ($\circ$), traditionally associated with paraconsistent logics, as a means of capturing non-normal modal classicalities within the Kripke framework. By semantically reinterpreting $\circ$ as an operator that distinguishes top and bottom values from other values in the algebra, we extend its applicability beyond paraconsistency into classical and modal logics. We introduce the logic $\mathcal{B}_4^\circ$, a four-valued Boolean logic augmented with the consistency operator, and provide a sound and complete axiomatization. Building on this foundation, we extend the semantics to the modal domain using the many-logics modal logic (MLML) framework. Specifically, we construct Kripke frames based on an eight-valued Boolean algebra that contains three distinct four-valued subalgebras, each representing a different world type. Our analysis reveals that the resulting modal logic exhibits a normal local consequence relation alongside a non-normal global consequence relation. Consequently, the characterization of frame properties --such as transitivity, reflexivity, and Euclideanness --deviates from modal logic $K$, requiring novel semantic tools. We further identify new modal formulas in an extended language that capture previously unavailable kinds of accessibility, leading to frame characterizations unattainable in traditional modal frameworks.

math.LO↗

arXiv2023

Non-tightness in class theory and second-order arithmetic

A theory T is tight if different deductively closed extensions of T (in the same language) cannot be bi-interpretable. Many well-studied foundational theories are tight, including PA [Visser2006], ZF, Z2, and KM [enayat2017]. In this article we extend Enayat's investigations to subsystems of these latter two theories. We prove that restricting the Comprehension schema of Z2 and KM gives non-tight theories. Specifically, we show that GB and ACA0 each admit different bi-interpretable extensions, and the same holds for their extensions by adding Sigma^1_k-Comprehension, for k <= 1. These results provide evidence that tightness characterizes Z2 and KM in a minimal way.

math.LO↗

arXiv2022

Essay on modality across different logics

In this paper, we deal with the problem of putting together modal worlds that operate in different logic systems. When evaluating a modal sentence $\Box φ$, we argue that it is not sufficient to inspect the truth of $φ$ in accessed worlds (possibly in different logics). Instead, ways of transferring more subtle semantic information between logical systems must be established. Thus, we will introduce modal structures that accommodate communication between logic systems by fixing a common lattice $L$ where different logics build their semantics. The semantics of each logic being considered in the modal structure is a sublattice of $L$. In this system, necessity and possibility of a statement should not solely rely on the satisfaction relation in each world and the accessibility relation. The value of a formula $\Box φ$ will be defined in terms of a comparison between the values of $φ$ in accessible worlds and the common lattice $L$. We will investigate natural instances where formulas $φ$ can be said to be necessary$/$possible even though all accessible world falsify $φ$. Finally, we will discuss frames that characterize dynamic relations between logic systems: classically increasing, classically decreasing and dialectic frames.

math.LO↗

arXiv2020

Bi-interpretation in weak set theories

In contrast to the robust mutual interpretability phenomenon in set theory, Ali Enayat proved that bi-interpretation is absent: distinct theories extending ZF are never bi-interpretable and models of ZF are bi-interpretable only when they are isomorphic. Nevertheless, for natural weaker set theories, we prove, including Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory $\text{ZFC}^-$ without power set and Zermelo set theory Z, there are nontrivial instances of bi-interpretation. Specifically, there are well-founded models of $\text{ZFC}^-$ that are bi-interpretable, but not isomorphic---even $\langle H_{ω_1},\in\rangle$ and $\langle H_{ω_2},\in\rangle$ can be bi-interpretable---and there are distinct bi-interpretable theories extending $\text{ZFC}^-$. Similarly, using a construction of Mathias, we prove that every model of ZF is bi-interpretable with a model of Zermelo set theory in which the replacement axiom fails.

math.LO↗

arXiv2020

Does set theory really ground arithmetic truth?

We consider the foundational relation between arithmetic and set theory. Our goal is to criticize the construction of standard arithmetic models as providing grounds for arithmetic truth (even in a relative sense). Our method is to emphasize the incomplete picture of both theories and treat models as their syntactical counterparts. Insisting on the incomplete picture will allow us to argue in favor of the revisability of the standard model interpretation. We then show that it is hopeless to expect that the relative grounding provided by a standard interpretation can resist being revisable. We start briefly characterizing the expansion of arithmetic truth provided by the interpretation in a set theory. Further, we show that, for every well-founded interpretation of recursive extensions of PA in extensions of ZF, the interpreted version of arithmetic has more theorems than the original. This theorem expansion is not complete however. We continue by defining the coordination problem. The problem can be summarized as follows. We consider two independent communities of mathematicians responsible for deciding over new axioms for ZF and PA. How likely are they to be coordinated regarding PAs interpretation in ZF? We prove that it is possible to have extensions of PA not interpretable in a given set theory ST. We further show that the probability of a random extension of arithmetic being interpretable in ST is zero.

math.LO↗