Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Reflection in Second-Order Set Theory with Abundant Urelements Bi-Interprets a Supercompact Cardinal.Joel David Hamkins & Bokai Yao - 2024 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 89 (3):1007-1043.
    After reviewing various natural bi-interpretations in urelement set theory, including second-order set theories with urelements, we explore the strength of second-order reflection in these contexts. Ultimately, we prove, second-order reflection with the abundant atom axiom is bi-interpretable and hence also equiconsistent with the existence of a supercompact cardinal. The proof relies on a reflection characterization of supercompactness, namely, a cardinal κ is supercompact if and only if every Π11 sentence true in a structure M (of any size) containing κ in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Reflection Principles and Second-Order Choice Principles with Urelements.Bokai Yao - 2022 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 173 (4):103073.
    We study reflection principles in Kelley-Morse set theory with urelements (KMU). We first show that First-Order Reflection Principle is not provable in KMU with Global Choice. We then show that KMU + Limitation of Size + Second-Order Reflection Principle is mutually interpretable with KM + Second-Order Reflection Principle. Furthermore, these two theories are also shown to be bi-interpretable with parameters. Finally, assuming the existence of a κ+-supercompact cardinal κ in KMU, we construct a model of KMU + Second-Order Reflection Principle (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Non-Tightness in Class Theory and Second-Order Arithmetic.Alfredo Roque Freire & Kameryn J. Williams - forthcoming - Journal of Symbolic Logic:1-28.
    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 $\mathsf {PA}$ [39], $\mathsf {ZF}$, $\mathsf {Z}_2$, and $\mathsf {KM}$ [6]. In this article we extend Enayat’s investigations to subsystems of these latter two theories. We prove that restricting the Comprehension schema of $\mathsf {Z}_2$ and $\mathsf {KM}$ gives non-tight theories. Specifically, we show that $\mathsf {GB}$ and $\mathsf {ACA}_0$ each admit different bi-interpretable extensions, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark