Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T23:23:44.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bounded existential induction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

George Wilmers
George Wilmers*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Manchester, Manchester ML 3 9PL, England
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The present work may perhaps be seen as a point of convergence of two historically distinct sequences of results. One sequence of results started with the work of Tennenbaum [59] who showed that there could be no nonstandard recursive model of the system PA of first order Peano arithmetic. Shepherdson [65] on the other hand showed that the system of arithmetic with open induction was sufficiently weak to allow the construction of nonstandard recursive models. Between these two results there remained for many years a large gap occasioned by a general lack of interest in weak systems of arithmetic. However Dana Scott observed that the addition alone of a nonstandard model of PA could not be recursive, while more recently McAloon [82] improved these results by showing that even for the weaker system of arithmetic with only bounded induction, neither the addition nor the multiplication of a nonstandard model could be recursive.

Another sequence of results starts with the work of Lessan [78], and independently Jensen and Ehrenfeucht [76], who showed that the structures which may be obtained as the reducts to addition of countable nonstandard models of PA are exactly the countable recursively saturated models of Presburger arithmetic. More recently, Cegielski, McAloon and the author [81] showed that the above result holds true if PA is replaced by the much weaker system of bounded induction.

However in both the case of the Tennenbaum phenomenon and in that of the recursive saturation of addition the problem remained open as to how strong a system was really necessary to generate the required phenomenon. All that was clear a priori was that open induction was too weak to produce either result.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 1985, pp. 72 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Cegielski, P., McAloon, K. and Wilmers, G. [81], Modèles récursivement saturés de l'addition et de la multiplication des entiers naturels, Logic Colloquium '80 (van Dalen, D. et al., editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1982, pp. 57–68.Google Scholar
Dimitracopoulos, C. [80], Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, 1980.Google Scholar
Friedman, H. [71], Countable models of set theories, Cambridge Summer School in Mathematical Logic, 1971, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 337, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1973, pp. 539–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, D. and Ehrenfeucht, A. [76], Some problems in elementary arithmetic, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 92 (1976), pp. 223–245.Google Scholar
Kirby, L. [77], Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, 1977.Google Scholar
Lessan, H. [78], Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, 1978.Google Scholar
Matijasevič, Y. [71], Diophantine representation of recursively enumerable predicates, Proceedings of the Second Scandinavian Logic Symposium (Fenstad, J. E., editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971, pp. 171–177.Google Scholar
McAloon, K. [82], On the complexity of models of arithmetic, this Journal, vol. 47 (1982), pp. 403–415.Google Scholar
Paris, J. [83], O struktuře modelu omezené E1-indukcje, Časopis pro pěstováni Matematiky (to appear).Google Scholar
Paris, J. and Wilkie, A. [81], ⊿0-sets and induction, Open days in model theory and set theory (Proceedings of the Jadwisin conference, 1981; Guzicki, W. et al., editors) (to appear).Google Scholar
Rogers, H. [67] Theory of recursive functions and effective computability, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
Scott, D. [62], Algebras of sets binumerable in complete extensions of arithmetic, Recursive function theory, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 5, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1962, pp. 117–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherdson, J. C. [65], Non-standard models for fragments of number theory, Theory of Models, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, pp. 342–358.Google Scholar
Tennenbaum, S. [59], Non-Archimedean models for arithmetic, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 6 (1959), p. 270, abstract 556–42.Google Scholar
Weiss, M. [80], Relatively diophantine predicates and exist entially complete models for arithmetic, Ph.D. Thesis, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1980.Google Scholar
Wilmers, G. [79], Minimally saturated models, Model theory of algebra and arithmetic (Conference Proceedings, Karpacz, Poland, 1979). Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 834, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980, pp. 370–380.Google Scholar