Generalized interpolation theorems

A semantical proof of Craig's interpolation theorem for the intuitionistic predicate logic and some intermediate prepositional logics will be given. Our proof is an extension of Henkin's method developed in [4]. It will clarify the relation between the interpolation theorem and Robinson's consistency theorem for these logics and will enable us to give a uniform way of proving the interpolation theorem for them.

Desirable properties of a logic include decidability, and a model theory that inherits properties of first-order logic, such as interpolation and preservation theorems. It is known that the Guarded Fragment (GF) of first-order logic is decidable and satisfies some preservation properties from first-order model theory; however, it fails to have Craig interpolation. The Guarded Negation Fragment (GNF), a recently defined extension, is known to be decidable and to have Craig interpolation. Here we give the first results on effective interpolation for extensions of GF. We provide an interpolation procedure for GNF whose complexity matches the doubly exponential upper bound for satisfiability of GNF. We show that the same construction gives not only Craig interpolation, but Lyndon interpolation and relativized interpolation, which can be used to provide effective proofs of some preservation theorems. We provide upper bounds on the size of GNF interpolants for both GNF and GF input, and complement this with matching lower bounds.

A proof of the (propositional) Craig interpolation theorem for cut-free sequent calculus yields that a sequent with a cut-free proof (or with a proof with cut-formulas of restricted form; in particular, with only analytic cuts) withkinferences has an interpolant whose circuit-size is at mostk. We give a new proof of the interpolation theorem based on a communication complexity approach which allows a similar estimate for a larger class of proofs. We derive from it several corollaries:(1)Feasible interpolation theorems for the following proof systems:(a)resolution(b)a subsystem ofLKcorresponding to the bounded arithmetic theory(α)(c)linear equational calculus(d)cutting planes.(2)New proofs of the exponential lower bounds (for new formulas)(a)for resolution ([15])(b)for the cutting planes proof system with coefficients written in unary ([4]).(3)An alternative proof of the independence result of [43] concerning the provability of circuit-size lower bounds in the bounded arithmetic theory(α).In the other direction we show that a depth 2 subsystem ofLKdoes not admit feasible monotone interpolation theorem (the so called Lyndon theorem), and that a feasible monotone interpolation theorem for the depth 1 subsystem ofLKwould yield new exponential lower bounds for resolution proofs of the weak pigeonhole principle.

Over the last decade, first-order constraints have been efficiently used in the artificial intelligence world to model many kinds of complex problems such as: scheduling, resource allocation, computer graphics and bio-informatics. Recently, a new property called decomposability has been introduced and many first-order theories have been proved to be decomposable: finite or infinite trees, rational and real numbers, linear dense order,...etc. A decision procedure in the form of five rewriting rules has also been developed. This latter can decide if a first-order formula without free variables is true or not in any decomposable theory. Unfortunately, this decision procedure is not enough when we want to express the solutions of a first-order constraint having free variables. These kind of problems are generally known as first-order constraint satisfaction problems. We present in this paper, not only a decision procedure but a full first-order constraint solver for decomposable theories. Our solver is given in the form of nine rewriting rules which transform any first-order constraint ? (which can possibly contain free variables) into an equivalent formula ? which is either the formula true, or the formula false or a simple solved formula having at least one free variable and being equivalent neither to true nor to false. We show the efficiency of our solver by solving complex first-order constraints over finite or infinite trees containing a huge number of imbricated quantifiers and negations and compare the performances with those obtained using the most recent and efficient dedicated solver for finite or infinite trees. This is the first full first-order constraint solver for any decomposable theory.

This paper shows that many notions in information theory (e.g. entropy, capacity regions) can be defined using probabilistic independence alone. We consider the first-order theory of random variables with the probabilistic independence relation, which concerns statements consisting only of random variables, the probabilistic independence symbol, logical operators, and existential and universal quantifiers. Although probabilistic independence is the only non-logical relation included, this theory is surprisingly expressive, and is able to express notions such as entropy and cardinality, and interpret the true first-order arithmetic over natural numbers (and hence is undecidable). We also characterize the capacity region for a general class of multiuser coding settings (including broadcast channel, interference channel and relay channel) using a first-order formula, which can be regarded as a "single-letter characterization" of the capacity region of the aforementioned settings (conventional single-letter characterizations are existential formulae, whereas our formula contains both existential and universal quantifiers).

We define and study types of a complete first-order theory T. This concept allows us to refine our analysis of Mod(T). If T has few types, then Mod(T) contains a uniquely defined smallest model that can be elementarily embedded into any structure of Mod(T). We investigate the various properties of these small models in Section 6.3. In Section 6.4, we consider the “big” models of Mod(T). For any theory, the number of types is related to the number of models of the theory. For any cardinal κ, I(T, κ) denotes the number of models in Mod(T) of size κ. We prove two basic facts regarding this cardinal function. In Section 6.5, we show that if T has many types, then I(T, κ) takes on its maximal possible value of 2κ for each infinite κ. In Section 6.6, we prove Vaught’s theorem stating that I(T, ℵ0) cannot equal 2. All formulas are first-order formulas. All theories are sets of first-order sentences. For any structure M, we conveniently refer to an n-tuple of elements from the underlying set of M as an “n-tuple of M.” The notion of a type extends the notion of a theory to include formulas and not just sentences. Whereas theories describe structures, types describe elements within a structure. Definition 6.1 Let M be a ν-structure and let ā = (a1, . . . , an) be an n-tuple of M. The type of ā in M, denoted tpM(ā), is the set of all ν-formulas φ having free variables among x1, . . . , xn that hold in M when each xi in is replaced by ai. More concisely, but less precisely: If ā is an n-tuple, then each formula in tpM(ā) contains at most n free variables but may contain fewer. In particular, the type of an n-tuple contains sentences. For any structure M and tuple ā of M, tpM(ā) contains Th(M) as a subset. The set tpM(ā) provides the complete first-order description of the tuple ā and how it sits in M.

Equational formulae are first-order formulae over an alphabet F of function symbols whose only predicate symbol is syntactic equality. Unification problems are an important special case of equational formulae, where no universal quantifiers and no negation occur. By the negation elimination problem we mean the problem of deciding whether a given equational formula is semantically equivalent to a unification problem. This decision problem has many interesting applications in machine learning, logic programming, functional programming, constrained rewriting, etc. In this work we present a new algorithm for the negation elimination problem of equational formulae with purely existential quantifier prefix. Moreover, we prove the coNP-completeness for equational formulae in DNF and the Π2p-hardness in case of CNF.

The set theory AFC was introduced by Perlis in [2] and he noted that it both includes and is stronger than Ackermann's set theory. We shall give a relative consistency result for AFC.AFC is obtained from Ackermann's set theory (see [2]) by replacing Ackermann's set existence schema with the schema(where ϕ, ψ, are ∈-formulae, x is not in ψ, w is not in ϕ, y is y1, …, yn, z is z1, …, zm and all free variables are shown) and adding the axiom of choice for sets. Following [1], we say that λ is invisible in Rκ if λ < κ and we haveholding for every ∈-formula θ which has exactly two free variables and does not involve u or υ. The existence of a Ramsey cardinal implies the existence of cardinals λ and κ with λ invisible in Rκ, and Theorem 1.13 of [1] gives some further indications about the relative strength of the notion of invisibility.Theorem. If there are cardinals λ and κ with λ invisible in Rκ, then AFC is consistent.Proof. Suppose that λ is invisible in Rκ and we will show that 〈Rκ, Rλ, ∈〉 ⊧ AFC (Rλ being the interpretation of V, of course).

The Craig interpolation theorem is shown for an extended LJ with strong negation. A new simple proof of this theorem is obtained. © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

On the non-separable theory of k-borel and k-souslin sets

Boolean classifying topoi

The purpose of this paper is to suggest two alternatives to Quine's definition of closure. These new definitions have two advantages over Quine's definition, and they probably are the simplest definitions having both advantages. The two advantages are:(1). Principle *101 becomes superfluous and may be dropped from Quine's set of principles for quantification. (In the case of my second definition, however, the dropping of *101 must be balanced by a slight change in *104.)(2). Closure is made independent of the alphabetical order of variables.The second of these advantages turns on the fact that the “alphabetical order” possessed by variables in virtue of their respective positions in the alphabet (or arbitrarily assigned to them) is a mere convention and not of genuine logical significance. It seems therefore desirable to consider some alternatives to Quine's definition of closure, since according to his definition the closure of a given formula will be one statement or another, depending upon whether or not one letter of the alphabet is alphabetically prior to a certain other letter. It is interesting that the removal of this minor artificiality also enables us to dispense with *101.According to Quine, the closure of a formula containing n free variables is obtained by prefixing to it in alphabetical order the n universal quantifiers formed from these variables by enclosing each in a pair of parentheses. (If n = 0 the formula is its own closure and is a “statement” rather than a “matrix.”) Thus the statement ‘(x)(y)(z)(xϵy ▪ yϵz)’ would be the closure of ‘xϵy ▪ yϵz’, but ‘(z)(x)(y)(xϵy ▪ yϵz)’ would not be its closure. Now there is no reason why ‘(z)(x)(y)(xϵy ▪ yϵz)’ or (y)(z)(x)(xϵy ▪ yϵz) and so on, could not just as well be regarded as “the” closure of ‘(xϵy ▪ yϵz’ as ‘(x)(y)(z)(xϵy ▪ yϵz)’. I therefore propose to allow to each formula not merely one closure, but as many closures as can be obtained by permuting in various ways the n prefixed universal quantifiers. In this way alphabetical order becomes irrelevant and no preference is given to one order of prefixed quantifiers in contrast to other orders which seem equally good. This constitutes my first redefinition of closure.

A number of efficient methods for evaluating first-order and monadic-second order queries on finite relational structures are based on tree-decompositions of structures or queries. We systematically study these methods.In the first part of the article, we consider arbitrary formulas on tree-like structures. We generalize a theorem of Courcelle [1990] by showing that on structures of bounded tree-width a monadic second-order formula (with free first- and second-order variables) can be evaluated in time linear in the structure size plus the size of the output.In the second part, we study tree-like formulas on arbitrary structures. We generalize the notions of acyclicity and bounded tree-width from conjunctive queries to arbitrary first-order formulas in a straightforward way and analyze the complexity of evaluating formulas of these fragments. Moreover, we show that the acyclic and bounded tree-width fragments have the same expressive power as the well-known guarded fragment and the finite-variable fragments of first-order logic, respectively.

We consider graph properties that can be checked from labels, i.e., bit sequences, of logarithmic length attached to vertices. We prove that there exists such a labeling for checking a first-order formula with free set variables in the graphs of every class that is \emph{nicely locally cwd-decomposable}. This notion generalizes that of a \emph{nicely locally tree-decomposable} class. The graphs of such classes can be covered by graphs of bounded \emph{clique-width} with limited overlaps. We also consider such labelings for \emph{bounded} first-order formulas on graph classes of \emph{bounded expansion}. Some of these results are extended to counting queries.

Descriptive complexity of #P functions: A new perspective