arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2404.12269

Upward L\"owenheim-Skolem-Tarski Numbers for Abstract Logics

Victoria Gitman·Jonathan Osinski
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Galeotti, Khomskii and V\"a\"an\"aanen recently introduced the notion of the upward L\"owenheim-Skolem-Tarski number for a logic, strengthening the classical notion of a Hanf number. A cardinal $\kappa$ is the \emph{upward L\"owenheim-Skolem-Tarski number} (ULST) of a logic $\mathcal L$ if it is the least cardinal with the property that whenever $M$ is a model of size at least $\kappa$ satisfying a sentence $\varphi$ in $\mathcal L$, then there are arbitrarily large models satisfying $\varphi$ and having $M$ as a substructure. The substructure requirement is what differentiates the ULST number from the Hanf number and gives the notion large cardinal strength. While it is a theorem of ZFC that every logic has a Hanf number, Galeotti, Khomskii and V\"a\"an\"anen showed that the existence of the ULST number for second-order logic implies the existence of a partially extendible cardinal. We answer positively their conjecture that the ULST number for second-order logic is the least extendible cardinal. We define the strong ULST number by strengthening the substructure requirement to elementary substructure. We investigate the ULST and strong ULST numbers for several classical strong logics: infinitary logics, the equicardinality logic, logic with the well-foundedness quantifier, second-order logic, and sort logics. We show that the ULST and the strong ULST numbers are characterized in some cases by classical large cardinals and in some cases by natural new large cardinal notions that they give rise to. We show that for some logics the notions of the ULST number, strong ULST number and least strong compactness cardinal coincide, while for others, it is consistent that they can be separated. Finally, we introduce a natural large cardinal notion characterizing strong compactness cardinals for the equicardinality logic.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Victoria Gitman, Jonathan Osinski. 2024-04-18. Upward L\"owenheim-Skolem-Tarski Numbers for Abstract Logics. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.12269

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗