Stephen George Simpson. with definition 1.2.3 and the discussion following it. For example, taking 90(n) to be the formula n §E Y, we have an instance of comprehension, VYEIXVn(n€X<—>n¢Y), asserting that for any given set Y there exists a ...

We show that certain model-theoretic forcing arguments involving subsystems of second-order arithmetic can be formalized in the base theory, thereby converting them to effective proof-theoretic arguments. We use this method to sharpen the conservation theorems of Harrington and Brown-Simpson, giving an effective proof that WKL+0 is conservative over RCA0 with no significant increase in the lengths of proofs.

We construct a weak second-order theory of arithmetic which includes Weak König's Lemma (WKL) for trees defined by bounded formulae. The provably total functions (with Σ b 1 -graphs) of this theory are the polynomial time computable functions. It is shown that the first-order strength of this version of WKL is exactly that of the scheme of collection for bounded formulae.

This paper develops the very basic notions of analysis in a weak second-order theory of arithmetic BTFA whose provably total functions are the polynomial time computable functions. We formalize within BTFA the real number system and the notion of a continuous real function of a real variable. The theory BTFA is able to prove the intermediate value theorem, wherefore it follows that the system of real numbers is a real closed ordered field. In the last section of the paper, we (...) show how to interpret the theory BTFA in Robinson's theory of arithmetic Q. This fact entails that the elementary theory of the real closed ordered fields is interpretable in Q. (shrink)

We apply the method of asymmetric interpretation to the basic fragment of bounded arithmetic, endowed with a weak collection schema, and to a system of “feasible analysis”, introduced by Ferreira and based on weak König's lemma, recursive comprehension and NP-notation induction. As a byproduct, we obtain two conservation results.

In this paper we give a partial answer to a conjecture of Tanaka. We prove that: if WKL0 proves a sentence of the form (∀X)(∃!Y)ψ(X, Y) for a Σ03-formula ψ, then so does RCA0.