In this paper we calibrate the exact proof-theoretic strength of Kruskal's theorem, thereby giving, in some sense, the most elementary proof of Kruskal's theorem. Furthermore, these investigations give rise to ordinal analyses of restricted bar induction.

We define a class of functions, the descent recursive functions, relative to an arbitrary elementary recursive system of ordinal notations. By means of these functions, we provide a general technique for measuring the proof-theoretic strength of a variety of systems of first-order arithmetic. We characterize the provable well-orderings and provably recursive functions of these systems, and derive various conservation and equiconsistency results.

Let $R$ be a (finite) rewrite system over a (finite) signature. Let $\succ$ be a strict well-founded termination ordering on the set of terms in question so that the rules of $R$ are reducing under $\succ$ . Then $R$ is terminating. In this article it is proved for a certain class of far reaching termination orderings (of order type reaching up to the first subrecursively inaccessible ordinal, i.e. the proof-theoretic ordinal of $ID_{<\omega}$ ) that – under some reasonable assumptions which (...) are met in current applications – the derivation lengths function for $R$ is bounded by a function from the slow growing hierarchy of level determined by the order type of the underlying termination ordering. This result is a (correction of the proof of and a) strong generalization of theorem 8.1 in Cichon's article Termination orderings and complexity characterisations. Leeds, Proof Theory 1990, (Aczel, Simmons, and Wainer, editors), Cambridge University Press 1992, 171-193. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungP. Bernays hat darauf hingewiesen, dass man, um die Widerspruchs freiheit der klassischen Zahlentheorie zu beweisen, den Hilbertschen flniter Standpunkt dadurch erweitern muss, dass man neben den auf Symbole sich beziehenden kombinatorischen Begriffen gewisse abstrakte Begriffe zulässt, Die abstrakten Begriffe, die bisher für diesen Zweck verwendet wurden, sinc die der konstruktiven Ordinalzahltheorie und die der intuitionistischer. Logik. Es wird gezeigt, dass man statt deesen den Begriff einer berechenbaren Funktion endlichen einfachen Typs über den natürlichen Zahler benutzen kann, wobei keine anderen (...) Konstruktionsverfahren für solche Funktionen nötig sind, als einfache Rekursion nach einer Zahlvariablen und Einsetzung von Funktionen ineinander .P. Bernays has pointed out that, in order to prove the consistency of classical number theory, it is necessary to extend Hilbert's finitary stand‐point by admitting certain abstract concepts in addition to the combinatorial concepts referring to symbols. The abstract concepts that so far have been used for this purpose are those of the constructive theory of ordinals and those of intuitionistic logic. It is shown that the concept of a computable function of finite simple type over the integers can be used instead, where no other procedures of constructing such functions are necessary except simple recursion by an integral variable and substitution of functions in each other. (shrink)

The termination of rewrite systems for parameter recursion, simple nested recursion and unnested multiple recursion is shown by using monotone interpretations both on the ordinals below the first primitive recursively closed ordinal and on the natural numbers. We show that the resulting derivation lengths are primitive recursive. As a corollary we obtain transparent and illuminating proofs of the facts that the schemata of parameter recursion, simple nested recursion and unnested multiple recursion lead from primitive recursive functions to primitive recursive functions.

Apologies. The purpose of the following talk is to give an overview of the present state of aims, methods and results in Pure Proof Theory. Shortage of time forces me to concentrate on my very personal views. This entails that I will emphasize the work which I know best, i.e., work that has been done in the triangle Stanford, Munich and Münster. I am of course well aware that there are as important results coming from outside this triangle and I (...) apologize for not displaying these results as well.Moreover the audience should be aware that in some points I have to oversimplify matters. Those who complain about that are invited to consult the original papers.1.1. General. Proof theory startedwithHilbert's Programme which aimed at a finitistic consistency proof for mathematics.By Gödel's Theorems, however, we know that we can neither formalize all mathematics nor even prove the consistency of formalized fragments by finitistic means. Inspite of this fact I want to give some reasons why I consider proof theory in the style of Gentzen's work still as an important and exciting field of Mathematical Logic. I will not go into applications of Gentzen's cut-elimination technique to computer science problems—this may be considered as applied proof theory—but want to concentrate on metamathematical problems and results. In this sense I am talking about Pure Proof Theory.Mathematicians are interested in structures. There is only one way to find the theorems of a structure. Start with an axiom system for the structure and deduce the theorems logically. These axiom systems are the objects of proof-theoretical research. Studying axiom systems there is a series of more or less obvious questions. (shrink)

In this article we give a unifying approach to the theory of fundamental sequences and their related Hardy hierarchies of number-theoretic functions and we show the equivalence of the new approach with the classical one.

We show that the consistency of the first order arithmetic $PA$ follows from the pointwise induction up to the Howard ordinal. Our proof differs from U. Schmerl [Sc]: We do not need Girard's Hierarchy Comparison Theorem. A modification on the ordinal assignment to proofs by Gentzen and Takeuti [T] is made so that one step reduction on proofs exactly corresponds to the stepping down $\alpha\mapsto\alpha [1]$ in ordinals. Also a generalization to theories $ID_q$ of finitely iterated inductive definitions is proved.