A discussion of the connections and differences between completeness and representation theorems in logic, with examples drawn from classical and modal logic, the logic of friendliness, and nonmonotonic reasoning.

A topological class logic is an infinitary logic formed by combining a first-order logic with the quantifier symbols O and C. The meaning of a formula closed by quantifier O is that the set defined by the formula is open. Similarly, a formula closed by quantifier C means that the set is closed. The corresponding models are a topological class spaces introduced by Ćirić and Mijajlović (Math Bakanica 1990). The completeness theorem is proved.

We prove that for any recursively axiomatized consistent extension T of Peano Arithmetic, there exists a \ provability predicate of T whose provability logic is precisely the modal logic \. For this purpose, we introduce a new bimodal logic \, and prove the Kripke completeness theorem and the uniform arithmetical completeness theorem for \.

The aim of the paper is to prove tha analytic completeness theorem for a logic LAs with two integral operators in the singular case. The case of absolute continuity was proved in [4]. MSC: 03B48, 03C70.

Hoover [2] proved a completeness theorem for the logic L[MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL A]. The aim of this paper is to prove a similar completeness theorem with respect to product measurable biprobability models for a logic Lmath image with two integral operators. We prove: If T is a ∑1 definable theory on [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL A] and consistent with the axioms of Lmath image, then there is an analytic absolutely continuous biprobability model in which every sentence in T is (...) satified. (shrink)

We give completeness results — with respect to Kripke's semantic — for the negation-free intermediate predicate calculi.

We initiate the study of computable model theory of modal logic, by proving effective completeness theorems for a variety of first-order modal logics. We formulate a natural definition of a decidable Kripke model, and show how to construct such a decidable Kripke model of a given decidable theory. Our construction is inspired by the effective Henkin construction for classical logic. The Henkin construction, however, depends in an essential way on the Deduction Theorem. In its usual form the Deduction Theorem (...) fails for modal logic. In our construction, the Deduction Theorem is replaced by a result about objects called finite Kripke diagrams. We argue that this result can be viewed as an analogue of the Deduction Theorem for modal logic. (shrink)

A propositional logic is defined which in addition to propositional language contains a list of probabilistic operators of the form P ≥s (with the intended meaning ‘‘the probability is at least s’’). The axioms and rules syntactically determine that ranges of probabilities in the corresponding models are always finite. The completeness theorem is proved. It is shown that completeness cannot be generalized to arbitrary theories.

This paper expands upon the work by Wang (Proceedings of TARK, pp. 493–512, 2017) who proposes a new framework based on quantifier-free predicate language extended by a new bundled modality \(\exists x\Box \) and axiomatizes the logic over S5 frames. This paper first gives complete axiomatizations of the logics over K, D, T, 4, S4 frames with increasing domains and constant domains, respectively. The systems w.r.t. constant domains feature infinitely many additional rules defined inductively than systems w.r.t. increasing domains. In (...) the second part of the paper, we show that these rules are admissible in the systems without them by providing a general strategy for proving completeness theorems for the logics without these rules over constant domain models (also increasing domain models). (shrink)

We show that several logics of common belief and common knowledge are not only complete, but also strongly complete, hence compact. These logics involve a weakened monotonicity axiom, and no other restriction on individual belief. The semantics is of the ordinary fixed-point type.

Here is an account of logical consequence inspired by Bolzano and Tarski. Logical validity is a property of arguments. An argument is a pair of a set of interpreted sentences (the premises) and an interpreted sentence (the conclusion). Whether an argument is logically valid depends only on its logical form. The logical form of an argument is fixed by the syntax of its constituent sentences, the meanings of their logical constituents and the syntactic differences between their non-logical constituents, treated as (...) variables. A constituent of a sentence is logical just if it is formal in meaning, in the sense roughly that its application is invariant under permutations of individuals.1 Thus ‘=’ is a logical constant because no permutation maps two individuals to one or one to two; ‘∈’ is not a logical constant because some permutations interchange the null set and its singleton. Truth functions, the usual quantifiers and bound variables also count as logical constants. An argument is logically valid if and only if the conclusion is true under every assignment of semantic values to variables (including all non-logical expressions) under which all its premises are true. A sentence is logically true if and only if the argument with no premises of which it is the conclusion is logically valid, that is, if and only if the sentence is true under every assignment of semantic values to variables. An interpretation assigns values to all variables. (shrink)

Here is an account of logical consequence inspired by Bolzano and Tarski. Logical validity is a property of arguments. An argument is a pair of a set of interpreted sentences (the premises) and an interpreted sentence (the conclusion). Whether an argument is logically valid depends only on its logical form. The logical form of an argument is fixed by the syntax of its constituent sentences, the meanings of their logical constituents and the syntactic differences between their non-logical constituents, treated as (...) variables. A constituent of a sentence is logical just if it is formal in meaning, in the sense roughly that its application is invariant under permutations of individuals.1 Thus ‘=’ is a logical constant because no permutation maps two individuals to one or one to two; ‘∈’ is not a logical constant because some permutations interchange the null set and its singleton. Truth functions, the usual quantifiers and bound variables also count as logical constants. An argument is logically valid if and only if the conclusion is true under every assignment of semantic values to variables (including all non-logical expressions) under which all its premises are true. A sentence is logically true if and only if the argument with no premises of which it is the conclusion is logically valid, that is, if and only if the sentence is true under every assignment of semantic values to variables. An interpretation assigns values to all variables. (shrink)

We prove a topological completeness theorem for the modal logic $$\textsf{GLP}$$ GLP containing operators $$\{\langle \xi \rangle :\xi \in \textsf{Ord}\}$$ { ⟨ ξ ⟩ : ξ ∈ Ord } intended to capture a wellordered sequence of consistency operators increasing in strength. More specifically, we prove that, given a tall-enough scattered space X, any sentence $$\phi $$ ϕ consistent with $$\textsf{GLP}$$ GLP can be satisfied on a polytopological space based on finitely many Icard topologies constructed over X and corresponding to (...) the finitely many modalities that occur in $$\phi $$ ϕ. (shrink)

Bolzano reduced inferential validity of the inference (from premise judgements to conclusion judgment) to the holding of logical consequence between the propositions (in themselves) that serve as contents of the respective judgements. This explicit reduction of inferential validity among judgements to logical consequence among propositions (or, alternatively, to logical truth of certain implicational propositions) has been largely taken over by current logical theory, say, by Wittgenstein’s Tractatus, by Hilbert and Ackermann, by Quine, and by Tarski also. Frege, though, stands out (...) among those who did not adopt such an account. Under the Bolzano reduction also some blind inferences, with no epistemic support, are deemed valid, which is unacceptable. The Completeness Theorem reduces inferential validity to the logical truth of a certain well-formed formula, whence the unacceptable blindness phenomena are retained. Accordingly, the interest of the Completeness Theorem for logic, construed as the theory of inference, is nugatory. (shrink)

Abstract.ΠMTL is a schematic extension of the monoidal t-norm based logic (MTL) by the characteristic axioms of product logic. In this paper we prove that ΠMTL satisfies the standard completeness theorem. From the algebraic point of view, we show that the class of ΠMTL-algebras (bounded commutative cancellative residuated l-monoids) in the real unit interval [0,1] generates the variety of all ΠMTL-algebras.

We study a modal extension of the Continuous First-Order Logic of Ben Yaacov and Pedersen :168–190, 2010). We provide a set of axioms for such an extension. Deduction rules are just Modus Ponens and Necessitation. We prove that our system is sound with respect to a Kripke semantics and, building on Ben Yaacov and Pedersen, that it satisfies a number of properties similar to those of first-order predicate logic. Then, by means of a canonical model construction, we get that every (...) consistent set of formulas is satisfiable. From the latter result we derive an Approximated Strong Completeness Theorem, in the vein of Continuous Logic, and a Compactness Theorem. (shrink)

Anderson and Belnap devise a model theory for entailment on which propositional identity equals proposional coentailment. This feature can be reasonably questioned. The authors devise two extensions of Anderson and Belnap’s model theory. Both systems preserve Anderson and Belnap’s results for entailment, but distinguish coentailment from identity.

Here we investigate the classes RCA $^\uparrow_\alpha$ of representable directed cylindric algebras of dimension α introduced by Nemeti[12]. RCA $^\uparrow_\alpha$ can be seen in two different ways: first, as an algebraic counterpart of higher order logics and second, as a cylindric algebraic analogue of Quasi-Projective Relation Algebras. We will give a new, "purely cylindric algebraic" proof for the following theorems of Nemeti: (i) RCA $^\uparrow_\alpha$ is a finitely axiomatizable variety whenever α ≥ 3 is finite and (ii) one can obtain (...) a strong representation theorem for RCA $^\uparrow_\alpha$ if one chooses an appropriate (non-well-founded) set theory as foundation of mathematics. These results provide a purely cylindric algebraic solution for the Finitization Problem (in the sense of [11]) in some non-well-founded set theories. (shrink)

A logic is said to admit an equational completeness theorem when it can be interpreted into the equational consequence relative to some class of algebras. We characterize logics admitting an equational completeness theorem that are either locally tabular or have some tautology. In particular, it is shown that a protoalgebraic logic admits an equational completeness theorem precisely when it has two distinct logically equivalent formulas. While the problem of determining whether a logic admits an equational completeness (...) theorem is shown to be decidable both for logics presented by a finite set of finite matrices and for locally tabular logics presented by a finite Hilbert calculus, it becomes undecidable for arbitrary logics presented by finite Hilbert calculi. (shrink)

Gives the first published adaptation of the Lindenbaum/Henkin method of maximal consistent sets for establishing the completeness of modal propositional logics with respect to the relational models of Kripke.

Dummett's logic LC quantified, Q-LC, is shown to be characterized by the extended frame Q+, ,D, where Q+ is the set of non-negative rational numbers, is the numerical relation less or equal then and D is the domain function such that for all v, w Q+, Dv and if v w, then D v . D v D w . Moreover, simple completeness proofs of extensions of Q-LC are given.

The success of the AGM paradigmn, Gis remarkable, as even a quick look at the literature it has generated will testify. But it is also remarkable, at least in hindsight, how limited was the original effort. For example, the theory concerns the beliefs of just one agent; all incoming information is accepted; belief change is uniquely determined by the new information; there is no provision for nested beliefs. And perhaps most surprising: there is no analysis of iterated change.

We prove a topological completeness theorem for infinitary geometric theories with respect to sheaf models. The theorem extends a classical result of Makkai and Reyes, stating that any topos with enough points has an open spatial cover. We show that one can achieve in addition that the cover is connected and locally connected.

A general strategy for proving completeness theorems for quantified modal logics is provided. Starting from free quantified modal logic K, with or without identity, extensions obtained either by adding the principle of universal instantiation or the converse of the Barcan formula or the Barcan formula are considered and proved complete in a uniform way. Completeness theorems are also shown for systems with the extended Barcan rule as well as for some quantified extensions of the modal logic B. The (...) incompleteness of Q°.B + BF is also proved. (shrink)

Urquhart and Méndez and Salto claim to establish completeness theorems for the system C and two of its negation extensions. In this note, we do the following three things: (1) provide a counterexample to all of these alleged completeness theorems, (2) attempt to diagnose the mistakes in the reported completeness proofs, and (3) provide complete axiomatizations of the desired systems.

In this paper, we investigate the logical strength of completeness theorems for intuitionistic logic along the program of reverse mathematics. Among others we show that is equivalent over to the strong completeness theorem for intuitionistic logic: any countable theory of intuitionistic predicate logic can be characterized by a single Kripke model.

The aim of this paper is to apply properties of the double dual endofunctor on the category of bounded distributive lattices and some extensions thereof to obtain completeness of certain non-classical propositional logics in a unified way. In particular, we obtain completeness theorems for Moisil calculus, n-valued Łukasiewicz calculus and Nelson calculus. Furthermore we show some conservativeness results by these methods.

Traditionally, many writers, following Kleene (1952), thought of the Church-Turing thesis as unprovable by its nature but having various strong arguments in its favor, including Turing’s analysis of human computation. More recently, the beauty, power, and obvious fundamental importance of this analysis, what Turing (1936) calls “argument I,” has led some writers to give an almost exclusive emphasis on this argument as the unique justification for the Church-Turing thesis. In this chapter I advocate an alternative justification, essentially presupposed by Turing (...) himself in what he calls “argument II.” The idea is that computation is a special form of mathematical deduction. Assuming the steps of the deduction can be stated in a first order language, the Church-Turing thesis follows as a special case of Gödel’s completeness theorem (first order algorithm theorem). I propose this idea as an alternative foundation for the Church-Turing thesis, both for human and machine computation. Clearly the relevant assumptions are justified for computations presently known. Other issues, such as the significance of Gödel’s 1931 Theorem IX for the Entscheidungsproblem, are discussed along the way. (shrink)

The paper expands upon the work by Wang [4], who proposes a new framework based on quantifier-free predicate language extended by a new modality ∃x□\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\exists x\Box $$\end{document} and axiomatizes the logic over S5 frames. This paper gives the logics over K, D, T, 4, S4 frames with increasing and constant domains. And we provide a general strategy for proving completeness theorems for logics w.r.t. the increasing domain and logics w.r.t. the (...) constant domain respectively. (shrink)

This paper presents an intuitionistic proof of a statement which under a classical reading is logically equivalent to Gödel's completeness theorem for classical predicate logic.

ABSTRACT In this paper we study consequence relations on the set of many sided sequents over a propositional language. We deal with the consequence relations axiomatized by the sequent calculi defined in [2] and associated with arbitrary finite algebras. These consequence relations are examples of what we call Gentzen systems. We define a semantics for these systems and prove a Strong Completeness Theorem, which is an extension of the Completeness Theorem for provable sequents stated in [2]. For the (...) special case of the finite linear MV-algebras, the Strong Completeness Theorem was proved in [10], as a consequence of McNaughton's Theorem. The main tool to prove this result for arbitrary algebras is the deduction-detachment theorem for Gentzen systems. (shrink)

In 1958 Arnould Bayart, 1911-1998, produced a semantics for first and second-order S5 modal logic, and in 1959 a completeness proof for first-order S5, and what he calls a 'quasi-completeness' proof for second-order S5. The 1959 paper is the first completeness proof for modal predicate logic based on the Henkin construction of maximal consistent sets, and indeed may be the easier application of the Henkin method even to propositional modal logic. The semantics is in terms of possible (...) worlds, which, Bayart notes, can be anything at all. The present paper provides an English translation of both these papers together with an historical introduction and a logical commentary. (shrink)

We consider the following generalization of the notion of a structure recursive relative to a set X. A relational structure A is said to be a Γ-structure if for each relation symbol R, the interpretation of R in A is ∑math image relative to X, where β = Γ. We show that a certain, fairly obvious, description of classes ∑math image of recursive infinitary formulas has the property that if A is a Γ-structure and S is a further relation on (...) A, then the following are equivalent: For every isomorphism F from A to a Γ-structure, F is ∑math image relative to X, The relation is defined in A by a ∑math image formula with parameters. (shrink)