8.3 The consistency proof -- 8.4 Applications of the consistency proof -- 8.5 Second-order arithmetic -- Problems -- Chapter 9: Set Theory -- 9.1 Axioms for sets -- 9.2 Development of set theory -- 9.3 Ordinals -- 9.4 Cardinals -- 9.5 Interpretations of set theory -- 9.6 Constructible sets -- 9.7 The axiom of constructibility -- 9.8 Forcing -- 9.9 The independence proofs -- 9.10 Large cardinals -- Problems -- Appendix The Word Problem -- Index.

A previously unexplored method, combining logical and mathematical elements, is shown to yield substantial numerical improvements in the area of Diophantine approximations. Kreisel illustrated the method abstractly by noting that effective bounds on the number of elements are ensured if Herbrand terms from ineffective proofs of Σ 2 -finiteness theorems satisfy certain simple growth conditions. Here several efficient growth conditions for the same purpose are presented that are actually satisfied in practice, in particular, by the proofs of Roth's theorem due (...) to Roth himself and to Esnault and Viehweg. The analysis of the former yields an exponential bound of order exp(70ε -2 d 2 ) in place of exp(285ε -2 d 2 ) given by Davenport and Roth in 1955, where α is (real) algebraic of degree d ≥ 2 and $|\alpha - pq^{-1}| . (Thus the new bound is less than the fourth root of the old one.) The new bounds extracted from the other proof are polynomial of low degree (in ε -1 and log d). Corollaries: Apart from a new bound for the number of solutions of the corresponding Diophantine equations and inequalities (among them Thue's inequality), $\log \log q_\nu , where q ν are the denominators of the convergents to the continued fraction of α. (shrink)

Kohlenbach, U., Effective moduli from ineffective uniqueness proofs. An unwinding of de La Vallée Poussin's proof for Chebycheff approximation, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 64 27–94.We consider uniqueness theorems in classical analysis having the form u ε U, v1, v2 ε Vu = 0 = G→v 1 = v2), where U, V are complete separable metric spaces, Vu is compact in V and G:U x V → is a constructive function.If is proved by arithmetical means from analytical assumptions x (...) εXy ε Yx z ε Z = 0) only , then we can extract from the proof of → an effective modulus of uniqueness, which depends on u, k but not on v1,v2, i.e., u ε U, v1, v2 ε Vu, k εG, G 2-φuk→dv2-itk). Such a modulus φ can e.g. be used to give a finite algorithm which computes the zero of G on Vu with prescribed precision if it exists classically.The extraction of φ uses a proof-theoretic combination of functional interpretation and pointwise majorization. If the proof of → uses only simple instances of induction, then φ is a simple mathematical operation. (shrink)