Changing a semantics: opportunism or courage?

The generalized models for higher-order logics introduced by Leon Henkin, and their multiple offspring over the years, have become a standard tool in many areas of logic. Even so, discussion has persisted about their technical status, and perhaps even their conceptual legitimacy. This paper gives a systematic view of generalized model techniques, discusses what they mean in mathematical and philosophical terms, and presents a few technical themes and results about their role in algebraic representation, calibrating provability, lowering complexity, understanding fixed-point logics, and achieving set-theoretic absoluteness. We also show how thinking about Henkin's approach to semantics of logical systems in this generality can yield new results, dispelling the impression of adhocness. This paper is dedicated to Leon Henkin, a deep logician who has changed the way we all work, while also being an always open, modest, and encouraging colleague and friend.Comment: 27 pages. To appear in: The life and work of Leon Henkin: Essays on his contributions (Studies in Universal Logic) eds: Manzano, M., Sain, I. and Alonso, E., 201

Some Turing-Complete Extensions of First-Order Logic

We introduce a natural Turing-complete extension of first-order logic FO. The extension adds two novel features to FO. The first one of these is the capacity to add new points to models and new tuples to relations. The second one is the possibility of recursive looping when a formula is evaluated using a semantic game. We first define a game-theoretic semantics for the logic and then prove that the expressive power of the logic corresponds in a canonical way to the recognition capacity of Turing machines. Finally, we show how to incorporate generalized quantifiers into the logic and argue for a highly natural connection between oracles and generalized quantifiers.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2014, arXiv:1408.556

Turing jumps through provability

Fixing some computably enumerable theory $T$, the Friedman-Goldfarb-Harrington (FGH) theorem says that over elementary arithmetic, each $\Sigma_1$ formula is equivalent to some formula of the form $\Box_T \varphi$ provided that $T$ is consistent. In this paper we give various generalizations of the FGH theorem. In particular, for $n>1$ we relate $\Sigma_{n}$ formulas to provability statements $[n]_T^{\sf True}\varphi$ which are a formalization of "provable in $T$ together with all true $\Sigma_{n+1}$ sentences". As a corollary we conclude that each $[n]_T^{\sf True}$ is $\Sigma_{n+1}$-complete. This observation yields us to consider a recursively defined hierarchy of provability predicates $[n+1]^\Box_T$ which look a lot like $[n+1]_T^{\sf True}$ except that where $[n+1]_T^{\sf True}$ calls upon the oracle of all true $\Sigma_{n+2}$ sentences, the $[n+1]^\Box_T$ recursively calls upon the oracle of all true sentences of the form $\langle n \rangle_T^\Box\phi$. As such we obtain a `syntax-light' characterization of $\Sigma_{n+1}$ definability whence of Turing jumps which is readily extended beyond the finite. Moreover, we observe that the corresponding provability predicates $[n+1]_T^\Box$ are well behaved in that together they provide a sound interpretation of the polymodal provability logic ${\sf GLP}_\omega$

The First-Order Theory of Sets with Cardinality Constraints is Decidable

We show that the decidability of the first-order theory of the language that combines Boolean algebras of sets of uninterpreted elements with Presburger arithmetic operations. We thereby disprove a recent conjecture that this theory is undecidable. Our language allows relating the cardinalities of sets to the values of integer variables, and can distinguish finite and infinite sets. We use quantifier elimination to show the decidability and obtain an elementary upper bound on the complexity. Precise program analyses can use our decidability result to verify representation invariants of data structures that use an integer field to represent the number of stored elements.Comment: 18 page

On the Logic of Belief and Propositional Quantification

We consider extending the modal logic KD45, commonly taken as the baseline system for belief, with propositional quantifiers that can be used to formalize natural language sentences such as “everything I believe is true” or “there is some-thing that I neither believe nor disbelieve.” Our main results are axiomatizations of the logics with propositional quantifiers of natural classes of complete Boolean algebras with an operator (BAOs) validating KD45. Among them is the class of complete, atomic, and completely multiplicative BAOs validating KD45. Hence, by duality, we also cover the usual method of adding propositional quantifiers to normal modal logics by considering their classes of Kripke frames. In addition, we obtain decidability for all the concrete logics we discuss

A Relational Formulation of the Theory of Types

This paper developes a relational---as opposed to a functional---theory of types. The theory is based on Hilbert and Bernays' eta operator plus the identity symbol, from which Church's lambda and the other usual operators are then defined. The logic is intended for use in the semantics of natural language