Fix \. Let \ denote first order logic restricted to the first n variables. Using the machinery of algebraic logic, positive and negative results on omitting types are obtained for \ and for infinitary variants and extensions of \.

We survey various results on the relationship among neat embeddings (a notion special to cylindric algebras), complete representations, omitting types, and amalgamation. A hitherto unpublished application of algebraic logic to omitting types of first-order logic is given.

We prove that the two-variable fragment of first-order intuitionistic logic is undecidable, even without constants and equality. We also show that the two-variable fragment of a quantified modal logic L with expanding first-order domains is undecidable whenever there is a Kripke frame for L with a point having infinitely many successors (such are, in particular, the first-order extensions of practically all standard modal logics like K, K4, GL, S4, S5, K4.1, S4.2, GL.3, etc.). For many quantified modal logics, including those (...) in the standard nomenclature above, even the monadic two-variable fragments turn out to be undecidable. (shrink)

We characterize the modal logics of elementary classes of Kripke frames as precisely those modal logics that are axiomatized by modal axioms synthesized in a certain effective way from "quasi-positive" sentences of hybrid logic. These are pure positive hybrid sentences with arbitrary existential and relativized universal quantification over nominals. The proof has three steps. The first step is to use the known result that the modal logic of any elementary class of Kripke frames is also the modal logic of the (...) closure of this class under disjoint unions, generated subframes, bounded morphic images, and ultraroots. This latter class can be defined by the first-order sentences of a special syntactic form (called pseudo-equations by Goldblatt) that are valid in the former class. The second step is to translate these pseudo-equations into equivalent quasi-positive hybrid sentences. In the third and main step, we show that any quasi-positive sentence S generates an infinite set of modal formulas called "approximants," which together axiomatize a canonical modal logic that is sound and complete for the class of frames validating S. The proof is analogous to standard proofs of Sahlqvist's theorem. It generalizes to sets of quasi-positive sentences. The main result now follows. (shrink)

We show that—unlike products of ‘transitive’ modal logics which are usually undecidable—their ‘expanding domain’ relativisations can be decidable, though not in primitive recursive time. In particular, we prove the decidability and the finite expanding product model property of bimodal logics interpreted in two-dimensional structures where one component—call it the ‘flow of time’—is • a finite linear order or a finite transitive tree and the other is composed of structures like • transitive trees/partial orders/quasi-orders/linear orders or only finite such structures expanding (...) over time. The decidability proof is based on Kruskal’s tree theorem, and the proof of non-primitive recursiveness is by reduction of the reachability problem for lossy channel systems. The result is used to show that the dynamic topological logic interpreted in topological spaces with continuous functions is decidable if the number of function iterations is assumed to be finite. (shrink)

Fix 2 < n < ω and let C A n denote the class of cylindric algebras of dimension n. Roughly, C A n is the algebraic counterpart of the proof theory of first-order logic restricted to the first n var...

This chapter presents a new semantics for inductive empirical knowledge. The epistemic agent is represented concretely as a learner who processes new inputs through time and who forms new beliefs from those inputs by means of a concrete, computable learning program. The agent’s belief state is represented hyper-intensionally as a set of time-indexed sentences. Knowledge is interpreted as avoidance of error in the limit and as having converged to true belief from the present time onward. Familiar topics are re-examined within (...) the semantics, such as inductive skepticism, the logic of discovery, Duhem’s problem, the articulation of theories by auxiliary hypotheses, the role of serendipity in scientific knowledge, Fitch’s paradox, deductive closure of knowability, whether one can know inductively that one knows inductively, whether one can know inductively that one does not know inductively, and whether expert instruction can spread common inductive knowledge—as opposed to mere, true belief—through a community of gullible pupils. (shrink)