It is a classical result of Mortimer that $L^2$ , first-order logic with two variables, is decidable for satisfiability. We show that going beyond $L^2$ by adding any one of the following leads to an undecidable logic:– very weak forms of recursion, viz.¶(i) transitive closure operations¶(ii) (restricted) monadic fixed-point operations¶– weak access to cardinalities, through the Härtig (or equicardinality) quantifier¶– a choice construct known as Hilbert's $\epsilon$ -operator.In fact all these extensions of $L^2$ prove to be undecidable both for satisfiability, (...) and for satisfiability in finite structures. Moreover most of them are hard for $\Sigma^1_1$ , the first level of the analytical hierachy, and thus have a much higher degree of undecidability than first-order logic. (shrink)

We identify the computational complexity of the satisfiability problem for FO 2 , the fragment of first-order logic consisting of all relational first-order sentences with at most two distinct variables. Although this fragment was shown to be decidable a long time ago, the computational complexity of its decision problem has not been pinpointed so far. In 1975 Mortimer proved that FO 2 has the finite-model property, which means that if an FO 2 -sentence is satisfiable, then it has a finite (...) model. Moreover, Mortimer showed that every satisfiable FO 2 -sentence has a model whose size is at most doubly exponential in the size of the sentence. In this paper, we improve Mortimer's bound by one exponential and show that every satisfiable FO 2 -sentence has a model whose size is at most exponential in the size of the sentence. As a consequence, we establish that the satisfiability problem for FO 2 is NEXPTIME-complete. (shrink)

We show that the existential preservation theorem fails for two-variable first-order logic FO2. It is known that for all k ≥ 3, FOk does not have an existential preservation theorem, so this settles the last open case, answering a question of Andreka, van Benthem, and Németi. In contrast, we prove that the homomorphism preservation theorem holds for FO2.

What precisely are fragments of classical first-order logic showing “modal” behaviour? Perhaps the most influential answer is that of Gabbay 1981, which identifies them with so-called “finite-variable fragments”, using only some fixed finite number of variables (free or bound). This view-point has been endorsed by many authors (cf. van Benthem 1991). We will investigate these fragments, and find that, illuminating and interesting though they are, they lack the required nice behaviour in our sense. (Several new negative results support this claim.) (...) As a counterproposal, then, we define a large fragment of predicate logic characterized by its use of only bounded quantification. This so-called guarded fragment enjoys the above nice properties, including decidability, through an effectively bounded finite model property. (These are new results, obtained by generalizing notions and techniques from modal logic.) Moreover, its own internal finite variable hierarchy turns out to work well. Finally, we shall make another move. The above analogy works both ways. Modal operators are like quantifiers, but quantifiers are also like modal operators. This observation inspires a generalized semantics for first-order predicate logic with accessibility constraints on available assignments (cf. N´emeti 1986, 1992) which moves the earlier quantifier restrictions into the semantics. This provides a fresh look at the landscape of possible predicate logics, including candidates sharing various desirable features with basic modal logic – in particular, its decidability. (shrink)