This paper is a presentation of astatus quæstionis, to wit of the problemof the interpretability logic of all reasonablearithmetical theories.We present both the arithmetical side and themodal side of the question.Dedicated to Dick de Jongh on the occasion of his 60th birthday.

Let PLω be the provability logic of IΔ0 + ω1. We prove some containments of the form L ⊆ PLω < Th(C) where L is the provability logic of PA and Th(C) is a suitable class of Kripke frames.

In [6] Albert Visser shows that ILP completely axiomatizes all schemata about provability and relative interpretability that are provable in finitely axiomatized theories. In this paper we introduce a system called $\text{ILP}^{\omega}$ that completely axiomatizes the arithmetically valid principles of provability in and interpretability over such theories. To prove the arithmetical completeness of $\text{ILP}^{\omega}$ we use a suitable kind of tail models; as a byproduct we obtain a somewhat modified proof of Visser's completeness result.

We study the relative strength of the two axioms Every Pell equation has a nontrivial solution Exponentiation is total over weak fragments, and we show they are equivalent over IE1. We then define the graph of the exponential function using only existentially bounded quantifiers in the language of arithmetic expanded with the symbol #, where # = x[log2y]. We prove the recursion laws of exponentiation in the corresponding fragment.

Gauss used quadratic forms in his second proof of quadratic reciprocity. In this paper we begin to develop a theory of binary quadratic forms over weak fragments of Peano Arithmetic, with a view to reproducing Gauss’ proof in this setting.

Gauss used quadratic forms in his second proof of quadratic reciprocity. In this paper we begin to develop a theory of binary quadratic forms over weak fragments of Peano Arithmetic, with a view to reproducing Gauss’ proof in this setting.

Gödel’s Second Incompleteness Theorem states axiom systems of sufficient strength are unable to verify their own consistency. We will show that axiomatizations for a computer’s floating point arithmetic can recognize their cut-free consistency in a stronger respect than is feasible under integer arithmetics. This paper will include both new generalizations of the Second Incompleteness Theorem and techniques for evading it.

This article will study a class of deduction systems that allow for a limited use of the modus ponens method of deduction. We will show that it is possible to devise axiom systems α that can recognize their consistency under a deduction system D provided that: (1) α treats multiplication as a 3-way relation (rather than as a total function), and that (2) D does not allow for the use of a modus ponens methodology above essentially the levels of Π1 (...) and Σ1 formulae. Part of what will make this boundary-case exception to the Second Incompleteness Theorem interesting is that we will also characterize generalizations of the Second Incompleteness Theorem that take force when we only slightly weaken the assumptions of our boundary-case exceptions in any of several further directions. (shrink)

By a theorem of R. Kaye, J. Paris and C. Dimitracopoulos, the class of the Πn+1-sentences true in the standard model is the only consistent Πn+1-theory which extends the scheme of induction for parameter free Πn+1-formulas. Motivated by this result, we present a systematic study of extensions of bounded quantifier complexity of fragments of first-order Peano Arithmetic. Here, we improve that result and show that this property describes a general phenomenon valid for parameter free schemes. As a consequence, we obtain (...) results on the quantifier complexity, finite axiomatizability and relative strength of schemes for Δn+1-formulas. (shrink)

We characterize the sets of all Π2 and all equation image theorems of IΠ−1 in terms of restricted exponentiation, and use these characterizations to prove that both sets are not deductively equivalent. We also discuss how these results generalize to n > 0. As an application, we prove that a conservation theorem of Beklemishev stating that IΠ−n + 1 is conservative over IΣ−n with respect to equation image sentences cannot be extended to Πn + 2 sentences. © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag (...) GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim. (shrink)

IΣ n andBΣ n are well known fragments of first-order arithmetic with induction and collection forΣ n formulas respectively;IΣ n 0 andBΣ n 0 are their second-order counterparts. RCA0 is the well known fragment of second-order arithmetic with recursive comprehension;WKL 0 isRCA 0 plus weak König's lemma. We first strengthen Harrington's conservation result by showing thatWKL 0 +BΣ n 0 is Π 1 1 -conservative overRCA 0 +BΣ n 0 . Then we develop some model theory inWKL 0 and illustrate (...) the use of formalized model theory by giving a relatively simple proof of the fact thatIΣ 1 provesBΣ n+1 to be Π n+2-conservative overIΣ n . Finally, we present a proof-theoretic proof of the stronger fact that theΠ n+2 conservation result is provable already inIΔ 0 + superexp. ThusIΣ n+1 proves 1-Con (BΣ n+1) andIΔ 0 +superexp proves Con (IΣ n )↔Con(BΣ n+1). (shrink)

We investigate the possibility to characterize (multi) functions that are Σ b i -definable with small i (i = 1, 2, 3) in fragments of bounded arithmetic T 2 in terms of natural search problems defined over polynomial-time structures. We obtain the following results: (1) A reformulation of known characterizations of (multi)functions that are Σ b 1 - and Σ b 2 -definable in the theories S 1 2 and T 1 2 . (2) New characterizations of (multi)functions that are (...) Σ b 2 - and Σ b 3 -definable in the theory T 2 2 . (3) A new non-conservation result: the theory T 2 2 (α) is not ∀Σ b 1 (α)-conservative over the theory S 2 2 (α). To prove that the theory T 2 2 (α) is not ∀Σ b 1 (α)-conservative over the theory S 2 2 (α), we present two examples of a Σ b 1 (α)-principle separating the two theories: (a) the weak pigeonhole principle WPHP (a 2 , f, g) formalizing that no function f is a bijection between a 2 and a with the inverse g, (b) the iteration principle Iter (a, R, f) formalizing that no function f defined on a strict partial order ( $\{0,\dots,a\}$ , R) can have increasing iterates. (shrink)

We investigate the possibility to characterize (multi)functions that are-definable with smalli(i= 1, 2, 3) in fragments of bounded arithmeticT2in terms of natural search problems defined over polynomial-time structures. We obtain the following results:(1) A reformulation of known characterizations of (multi)functions that areand-definable in the theoriesand.(2) New characterizations of (multi)functions that areand-definable in the theory.(3) A new non-conservation result: the theoryis not-conservative over the theory.To prove that the theoryis not-conservative over the theory, we present two examples of a-principle separating the two (...) theories:(a) the weak pigeonhole principle WPHP(a2,f, g) formalizing that no functionfis a bijection betweena2andawith the inverseg,(b) the iteration principle Iter(a, R, f) formalizing that no functionfdefined on a strict partial order ({0,…, a},R) can have increasing iterates. (shrink)

Using nonstandard methods we construct a model of an induction scheme called inside a "resource" of the form is a Turing machine of code is calculated in less than , where means the length of the binary expansion of and are nonstandard parameters in a model of . As a consequence we obtain a model theoretic proof of a witnessing theorem for this theory by functions computable in time , a result first obtained by Buss, Krajícek, and Takeuti using proof (...) theory. (shrink)

The bounded arithmetic theory S2 is finitely axiomatized if and only if the polynomial hierarchy provably collapses. If T2i equals S2i + 1 then T2i is equal to S2 and proves that the polynomial time hierarchy collapses to ∑i + 3p, and, in fact, to the Boolean hierarchy over ∑i + 2p and to ∑i + 1p/poly.

This paper discusses lower bounds for proof length, especially as measured by number of steps (inferences). We give the first publicly known proof of Gödel's claim that there is superrecursive (in fact. unbounded) proof speedup of (i + 1)st-order arithmetic over ith-order arithmetic, where arithmetic is formalized in Hilbert-style calculi with + and · as function symbols or with the language of PRA. The same results are established for any weakly schematic formalization of higher-order logic: this allows all tautologies as (...) axioms and allows all generalizations of axioms as axioms. Our first proof of Gödel's claim is based on self-referential sentences: we give a second proof that avoids the use of self-reference based loosely on a method of Statman. (shrink)

Guided by questions of scope, this paper provides an overview of what is known about both the scope and, consequently, the limits of Gödel’s famous first incompleteness theorem.

We prove that the theory IΔ0, extended by a weak version of the Δ0-Pigeonhole Principle, proves that every integer is the sum of four squares (Lagrange's theorem). Since the required weak version is derivable from the theory IΔ0 + ∀x (xlog(x) exists), our results give a positive answer to a question of Macintyre (1986). In the rest of the paper we consider the number-theoretical consequences of a new combinatorial principle, the ‘Δ0-Equipartition Principle’ (Δ0EQ). In particular we give a new proof, (...) which can be formalized in IΔ0 + Δ0EQ, of the fact that every prime of the form 4n + 1 is the sum of two squares. (shrink)

We prove that if G is a Δ 0 -definable function on the natural numbers and F = Π i = 0 n G , then F is also Δ 0 -definable. Moreover, the inductive properties of F can be proved inside the theory IΔ 0.

A well-known result states that, over basic Kalmar elementary arithmetic EA, the induction schema for ∑n formulas is equivalent to the uniform reflection principle for ∑n + 1 formulas . We show that fragments of arithmetic axiomatized by various forms of induction rules admit a precise axiomatization in terms of reflection principles as well. Thus, the closure of EA under the induction rule for ∑n formulas is equivalent to ω times iterated ∑n reflection principle. Moreover, for k < ω, k (...) times iterated ∑n reflection principle over EA precisely corresponds to the extension of EA by k nested applications of ∑n induction rule.The above relationship holds in greater generality than just stated. In fact, we give general formulas characterizing in terms of iterated reflection principles the extension of any given theory by k nested applications of ∑n or Πn induction rules. In particular, the closure of a theory T under just one application of ∑1 induction rule is equivalent to T together with ∑1 reflection principle for each finite Π2 axiomatized subtheory of T.These results have closely parallel ones in the theory of subrecursive function classes. The rules under study correspond, in a canonical way, to natural closure operators on the classes of provably recursive functions. Thus, ∑1 induction rule precisely corresponds to the primitive recursive closure operator, and ∑1 collection rule, introduced below, corresponds to the elementary closure operator. (shrink)

We characterize the bimodal provability logics for certain natural (classes of) pairs of recursively enumerable theories, mostly related to fragments of arithmetic. For example, we shall give axiomatizations, decision procedures, and introduce natural Kripke semantics for the provability logics of (IΔ 0 + EXP, PRA); (PRA, IΣ 1 ); (IΣ m , IΣ n ) for $1 \leq m etc. For the case of finitely axiomatized extensions of theories these results are extended to modal logics with propositional constants.

We define and study a new restricted consistency notion RCon ∗ for bounded arithmetic theories T 2 j . It is the strongest ∀ Π 1 b -statement over S 2 1 provable in T 2 j , similar to Con in Krajíček and Pudlák, 29) or RCon in Krajı́ček and Takeuti 107). The advantage of our notion over the others is that RCon ∗ can directly be used to construct models of T 2 j . We apply this by (...) proving preservation theorems for theories of bounded arithmetic of the following well-known kind: The ∀ Π 1 b -separation of bounded arithmetic theories S 2 i from T 2 j is equivalent to the existence of a model of S 2 i which does not have a Δ 0 b -elementary extension to a model of T 2 j . More specific, let M ⊨ Ω 1 nst denote that there is a nonstandard element c in M such that the function n ↦ 2 log c is total in M . Let BLΣ 1 b be the bounded collection schema for Σ 1 b -formulas. We obtain the following preservation results: the ∀ Π 1 b -separation of S 2 i from T 2 j is equivalent to the existence of 1. a model of S 2 i +Ω 1 nst which is 1 b -closed w.r.t. T 2 j , 2. a countable model of S 2 i + BLΣ 1 b without weak end extensions to models of T 2 j. (shrink)

We consider equational theories for functions defined via recursion involving equations between closed terms with natural rules based on recursive definitions of the function symbols. We show that consistency of such equational theories can be proved in the weak fragment of arithmetic S 1 2 . In particular this solves an open problem formulated by TAKEUTI (c.f. [5, p.5 problem 9.]).

Dynamic ordinal analysis is ordinal analysis for weak arithmetics like fragments of bounded arithmetic. In this paper we will define dynamic ordinals – they will be sets of number theoretic functions measuring the amount of sΠ b 1(X) order induction available in a theory. We will compare order induction to successor induction over weak theories. We will compute dynamic ordinals of the bounded arithmetic theories sΣ b n (X)−L m IND for m=n and m=n+1, n≥0. Different dynamic ordinals lead to (...) separation. In this way we will obtain several separation results between these relativized theories. We will generalize our results to further languages extending the language of bounded arithmetic. (shrink)

Paul Cohen’s method of forcing, together with Saul Kripke’s related semantics for modal and intuitionistic logic, has had profound effects on a number of branches of mathematical logic, from set theory and model theory to constructive and categorical logic. Here, I argue that forcing also has a place in traditional Hilbert-style proof theory, where the goal is to formalize portions of ordinary mathematics in restricted axiomatic theories, and study those theories in constructive or syntactic terms. I will discuss the aspects (...) of forcing that are useful in this respect, and some sample applications. The latter include ways of obtaining conservation results for classical and intuitionistic theories, interpreting classical theories in constructive ones, and constructivizing model-theoretic arguments. (shrink)

This paper is concerned with the logical structure of arithmetical theories. We survey results concerning logics and admissible rules of constructive arithmetical theories. We prove a new theorem: the admissible propositional rules of Heyting Arithmetic are the same as the admissible propositional rules of Intuitionistic Propositional Logic. We provide some further insights concerning predicate logical admissible rules for arithmetical theories.

We formulate a Π1 sentence τ which is a version of the Tableau consistency of GlΔ0. The sentence τ is true and is provable in GlΔ0 + exp. We construct a model M of GlΔ0+Ω1+τ+BGs1 which has no proper end-extension to a model of GlΔ0+Ω1+τ. Also we prove that GlΔ0+Ω1+τ is not Π1 conservative over GlΔ0+τ.

We show that every model of IΔ0 has an end extension to a model of a theory where log-space computable function are formalizable. We also show the existence of an isomorphism between models of IΔ0 and models of linear arithmetic LA.

This paper presents proof that Buss's S22 can prove the consistency of a fragment of Cook and Urquhart's PV from which induction has been removed but substitution has been retained. This result improves Beckmann's result, which proves the consistency of such a system without substitution in bounded arithmetic S12. Our proof relies on the notion of "computation" of the terms of PV. In our work, we first prove that, in the system under consideration, if an equation is proved and either (...) its left- or right-hand side is computed, then there is a corresponding computation for its right- or left-hand side, respectively. By carefully computing the bound of the size of the computation, the proof of this theorem inside a bounded arithmetic is obtained, from which the consistency of the system is readily proven. This result apparently implies the separation of bounded arithmetic because Buss and Ignjatović stated that it is not possible to prove the consistency of a fragment of PV without induction but with substitution in Buss's S12. However, their proof actually shows that it is not possible to prove the consistency of the system, which is obtained by the addition of propositional logic and other axioms to a system such as ours. On the other hand, the system that we have considered is strictly equational, which is a property on which our proof relies. (shrink)

We will study several weak axiom systems that use the Subtraction and Division primitives (rather than Addition and Multiplication) to formally encode the theorems of Arithmetic. Provided such axiom systems do not recognize Multiplication as a total function, we will show that it is feasible for them to verify their Semantic Tableaux, Herbrand, and Cut-Free consistencies. If our axiom systems additionally do not recognize Addition as a total function, they will be capable of recognizing the consistency of their Hilbert-style deductive (...) proofs. Our axiom systems will not be strong enough to recognize their Canonical Reflection principle, but they will be capable of recognizing an approximation of it, called the "Tangibility Reflection Principle". We will also prove some new versions of the Second Incompleteness Theorem stating essentially that it is not possible to extend our exceptions to the Incompleteness Theorem much further. (shrink)

In 1981, Paris and Wilkie raised the open question about whether and to what extent the axiom system did satisfy the Second Incompleteness Theorem under Semantic Tableaux deduction. Our prior work showed that the semantic tableaux version of the Second Incompleteness Theorem did generalize for the most common definition of appearing in the standard textbooks.However, there was an alternate interesting definition of this axiom system in the Wilkie–Paris article in the Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 35 , pp. 261–302 (...) which we did not examine in our year-2002 article in the Journal of Symbolic Logic. Our first goal is to show that the incompleteness results of our prior paper can generalize in this alternate context. We will also develop a formal analysis, using a new technique called Passive Induction, that is simpler than the formalism we had used before.A further reason our results are of interest is that we have shown in a companion paper published in Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 165 , pp. 213–226 that some very unorthodox axiomizations for are anti-thresholds for the Herbrandized version of the Second Incompleteness Theorem. Thus, different axiomizations for have nearly fully opposite incompleteness properties.This paper is self-contained. It will not require a knowledge of our earlier results. (shrink)

Let us recall that Raphael Robinson's Arithmetic Q is an axiom system that differs from Peano Arithmetic essentially by containing no Induction axioms [13], [18]. We will generalize the semantic-tableaux version of the Second Incompleteness Theorem almost to the level of System Q. We will prove that there exists a single rather long Π 1 sentence, valid in the standard model of the Natural Numbers and denoted as V, such that if α is any finite consistent extension of Q + (...) V then α will be unable to prove its Semantic Tableaux consistency. The same result will also apply to axiom systems α with infinite cardinality when these infinite-sized axiom systems satisfy a minor additional constraint, called the Conventional Encoding Property. Our formalism will also imply that the semantic-tableaux version of the Second Incompleteness Theorem generalizes for the axiom system IΣ 0 , as well as for all its natural extensions. (This answers an open question raised twenty years ago by Paris and Wilkie [15].). (shrink)

This paper will introduce the notion of a naming convention and use this paradigm to both develop a new version of the Second Incompleteness Theorem and to describe when an axiom system can partially evade the Second Incompleteness Theorem.

In his 1967 paper Vaught used an ingenious argument to show that every recursively enumerable first order theory that directly interprets the weak system VS of set theory is axiomatizable by a scheme. In this paper we establish a strengthening of Vaught's theorem by weakening the hypothesis of direct interpretability of VS to direct interpretability of the finitely axiomatized fragment VS2 of VS. This improvement significantly increases the scope of the original result, since VS is essentially undecidable, but VS2 has (...) decidable extensions. We also explore the ramifications of our work on finite axiomatizability of schemes in the presence of suitable comprehension principles. (shrink)

In this paper we formulate a version of Second Incompleteness Theorem. The idea is that a sequential sentence has ‘consistency power’ over a theory if it enables us to construct a bounded interpretation of that theory. An interpretation of V in U is bounded if, for some n , all translations of V -sentences are U -provably equivalent to sentences of complexity less than n . We call a sequential sentence with consistency power over T a pro-consistency statement for T (...) . We study pro-consistency statements. We provide an example of a pro-consistency statement for a sequential sentence A that is weaker than an ordinary consistency statement for A . We show that, if A is $${{\sf S}^{1}_{2}}$$ , this sentence has some further appealing properties, specifically that it is an Orey sentence for EA . The basic ideas of the paper essentially involve sequential theories. We have a brief look at the wider environment of the results, to wit the case of theories with pairing. (shrink)

The central result of this paper is the small‐is‐very‐small principle for restricted sequential theories. The principle says roughly that whenever the given theory shows that a definable property has a small witness, i.e., a witness in a sufficiently small definable cut, then it shows that the property has a very small witness: i.e., a witness below a given standard number. Which cuts are sufficiently small will depend on the complexity of the formula defining the property. We draw various consequences from (...) the central result. E.g., roughly speaking, (i) every restricted, recursively enumerable sequential theory has a finitely axiomatized extension that is conservative with respect to formulas of complexity ; (ii) every sequential model has, for any n, an extension that is elementary for formulas of complexity, in which the intersection of all definable cuts is the natural numbers; (iii) we have reflection for ‐sentences with sufficiently small witness in any consistent restricted theory U; (iv) suppose U is recursively enumerable and sequential. Suppose further that every recursively enumerable and sequential V that locally inteprets U, globally interprets U. Then, U is mutually globally interpretable with a finitely axiomatized sequential theory. The paper contains some careful groundwork developing partial satisfaction predicates in sequential theories for the complexity measure depth of quantifier alternations. (shrink)

We show that a consistent, finitely axiomatized, sequential theory cannot prove its own inconsistency on every definable cut. A corollary is that there are at least three degrees of global interpretability of theories equivalent modulo local interpretability to a consistent, finitely axiomatized, sequential theory U.

This paper contains a careful derivation of principles of Interpretability Logic valid in extensions of I0+1.

In this paper, we characterize the strength of the predicative Frege hierarchy, , introduced by John Burgess in his book [J. Burgess, Fixing frege, in: Princeton Monographs in Philosophy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2005]. We show that and are mutually interpretable. It follows that is mutually interpretable with Q. This fact was proved earlier by Mihai Ganea in [M. Ganea, Burgess’ PV is Robinson’s Q, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 619–624] using a different proof. Another consequence of the our (...) main result is that is mutually interpretable with Kalmar Arithmetic . The fact that interprets EA was proved earlier by Burgess. We provide a different proof. Each of the theories is finitely axiomatizable. Our main result implies that the whole hierarchy taken together, , is not finitely axiomatizable. What is more: no theory that is mutually locally interpretable with is finitely axiomatizable. (shrink)

In this paper, we show how to construct for a given consistent theory U a $$\varSigma ^0_1$$ Σ 1 0 -predicate that both satisfies the Löb Conditions and the Kreisel Condition—even if U is unsound. We do this in such a way that U itself can verify satisfaction of an internal version of the Kreisel Condition.

In this paper we study the interpretations of a weak arithmetic, like Buss’s theory $\mathsf{S}^{1}_{2}$, in a given theory $U$. We call these interpretations the arithmetics of $U$. We develop the basics of the structure of the arithmetics of $U$. We study the provability logic of $U$ from the standpoint of the framework of the arithmetics of $U$. Finally, we provide a deeper study of the arithmetics of a finitely axiomatized sequential theory.

In this paper we study local induction w.r.t. Σ1‐formulas over the weak arithmetic. The local induction scheme, which was introduced in, says roughly this: for any virtual class that is progressive, i.e., is closed under zero and successor, and for any non‐empty virtual class that is definable by a Σ1‐formula without parameters, the intersection of and is non‐empty. In other words, we have, for all Σ1‐sentences S, that S implies, whenever is progressive. Since, in the weak context, we have (at (...) least) two definitions of Σ1, we obtain two minimal theories of local induction w.r.t. Σ1‐formulas, which we call Peano Corto and Peano Basso.In the paper we give careful definitions of Peano Corto and Peano Basso. We establish their naturalness both by giving a model theoretic characterization and by providing an equivalent formulation in terms of a sentential reflection scheme.The theories Peano Corto and Peano Basso occupy a salient place among the sequential theories on the boundary between weak and strong theories. They bring together a powerful collection of principles that is locally interpretable in. Moreover, they have an important role as examples of various phenomena in the metamathematics of arithmetical (and, more generally, sequential) theories. We illustrate this by studying their behavior w.r.t. interpretability, model interpretability and local interpretability. In many ways the theories are more like Peano arithmetic or Zermelo Fraenkel set theory, than like finitely axiomatized theories as Elementary Arithmetic, and. On the one hand, Peano Corto and Peano Basso are very weak: they are locally cut‐interpretable in. On the other hand, they behave as if they were strong: they are not contained in any consistent finitely axiomatized arithmetical theory, however strong. Moreover, they extend, the theory of parameter‐free Π1‐induction. (shrink)

In this paper we show that the degrees of interpretability of finitely axiomatized extensions-in-the-same-language of a finitely axiomatized sequential theory—like Elementary Arithmetic EA, IΣ1, or the Gödel–Bernays theory of sets and classes GB—have suprema. This partially answers a question posed by Švejdar in his paper (Commentationes Mathematicae Universitatis Carolinae 19:789–813, 1978). The partial solution of Švejdar’s problem follows from a stronger fact: the convexity of the degree structure of finitely axiomatized extensions-in-the-same-language of a finitely axiomatized sequential theory in the degree (...) structure of the degrees of all finitely axiomatized sequential theories. In the paper we also study a related question: the comparison of structures for interpretability and derivability. In how far can derivability mimic interpretability? We provide two positive results and one negative result. (shrink)