Search results for 'Infinitary languages' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  3
    M. A. Dickmann (1975). Large Infinitary Languages: Model Theory. American Elsevier Pub. Co..
  2. M. A. Dickmann (1970). Model Theory of Infinitary Languages. [Aarhus, Denmark,Universitet, Matematisk Institut].
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Herman Ruge Jervell (1972). Herbrand and Skolem Theorems in Infinitary Languages. Oslo,Universitetet I Oslo, Matematisk Institutt.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Attila Máté (1971). Incompactness in Infinitary Languages with Respect to Boolean-Valued Interpretations. Szeged,University of Szeged Bolyai Mathematical Institute.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. John Bell, Infinitary Languages.
    We begin with the following quotation from Karp [1964]: My interest in infinitary logic dates back to a February day in 1956 when I remarked to my thesis supervisor, Professor Leon Henkin, that a particularly vexing problem would be so simple if only I could write a formula which would say x = 0 or x = 1 or x = 2 etc. To my surprise, he replied, "Well, go ahead." Traditionally, expressions in formal systems have been regarded as (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Gonzalo E. Reyes (1972). Lω₁Ω is Enough: A Reduction Theorem for Some Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):705-710.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. John Gregory (1974). Beth Definability in Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (1):22-26.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  8. Kenneth Kunen (1968). Implicit Definability and Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 33 (3):446-451.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  9.  8
    Jaakko Hintikka & Veikko Rantala (1976). A New Approach to Infinitary Languages. Annals of Mathematical Logic 10 (1):95-115.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  10.  4
    Carol Wood (1972). Forcing for Infinitary Languages. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 18 (25-30):385-402.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  11.  4
    Jean-Pierre Calais (1972). Partial Isomorphisms and Infinitary Languages. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 18 (25-30):435-456.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  4
    Newton C. A. da Costa & Charles C. Pinter (1976). Α Logic and Infinitary Languages. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 22 (1):105-112.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  6
    Saharon Shelah (1973). Weak Definability in Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 38 (3):399-404.
    We shall prove that if a model of cardinality κ can be expanded to a model of a sentence ψ of Lλ+,ω by adding a suitable predicate in more than κ ways, then, it has a submodel of power μ which can be expanded to a model of ψ in $> \mu$ ways provided that λ,κ,μ satisfy suitable conditions.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  1
    Carol Wood (1972). Forcing for Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 18 (25‐30):385-402.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  15.  4
    Jörg Flum (1971). A Remark on Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 36 (3):461-462.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  7
    Anders M. Nyberg (1976). Uniform Inductive Definability and Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 41 (1):109-120.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  17.  3
    Victor Harnik (1986). Review: David W. Kueker, Lowenheim-Skolem and Interpolation Theorems in Infinitary Languages; K. Jon Barwise, Mostowski's Collapsing Function and the Closed Unbounded Filter; David W. Kueker, Countable Approximations and Lowenheim-Skolem Theorems. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 51 (1):232-234.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  1
    Jon Barwise (1968). Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 72 (1):1--35.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  2
    Karl‐Heinz Diener (1983). On Constructing Infinitary Languages Lα Β Without the Axiom of Choice. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 29 (6):357-376.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  2
    Jean‐Pierre Calais (1972). Partial Isomorphisms and Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 18 (25‐30):435-456.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. C. C. Chang (1972). Review: Jorg Flum, A Remark on Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):764-764.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. N. J. Cutland (1974). Karp Carol. An Algebraic Proof of the Barwise Compactness Theorem. The Syntax and Semantics of Infinitary Languages, Edited by Barwise Jon, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, No. 72, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York, 1968, Pp. 80–95. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (2):335.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Newton C. A. da Costa & Charles C. Pinter (1976). Α Logic and Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 22 (1):105-112.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Jörg Flum (1974). Malitz Jerome. Universal Classes in Infinitary Languages. Duke Mathematical Journal, Vol. 36 , Pp. 621–630. Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (2):336.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Jorg Flum (1974). Review: Jerome Malitz, Universal Classes in Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (2):336-336.
  26. Victor Harnik (1986). Kueker David W.. Löwenheim–Skolem and Interpolation Theorems in Infinitary Languages. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 78 , Pp. 211–215.Barwise K. Jon. Mostowski's Collapsing Function and the Closed Unbounded Filter. Fundamenta Mathematicae, Vol. 82 No. 2 , Pp. 95–103.Kueker David W.. Countable Approximations and Löwenheim–Skolem Theorems. Annals of Mathematical Logic, Vol. 11 , Pp. 57–103. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 51 (1):232-234.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar (1970). Kunen Kenneth. Implicit Definability and Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (2):341-342.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar (1970). Review: Kenneth Kunen, Implicit Definability and Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (2):341-342.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Mihály Makkai (1972). Barwise Jon. Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. The Syntax and Semantics of Infinitary Languages, Edited by Barwise Jon, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, No. 72, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York, 1968, Pp. 1–35. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (1):201-202.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Michael Makkai (1978). Dickmann M. A.. Large Infinitary Languages. Model Theory. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, Vol. 83. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam and Oxford, and American Elsevier Publishing Company, Inc., New York, 1975, Xv+ 464 Pp. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 43 (1):144-145.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Mihaly Makkai (1972). Review: Jon Barwise, Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (1):201-202.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Michael Makkai (1978). Review: M. A. Dickmann, Large Infinitary Languages. Model Theory. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 43 (1):144-145.
  33. Gonzalo E. Reyes (1972). $L{Omega1omega}$ is Enough: A Reduction Theorem for Some Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):705-710.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Alexandre Rodrigues, Ricardo Filho & Edelcio de Souza (2010). Definability in Infinitary Languages and Invariance by Automorphims. Reports on Mathematical Logic:119-133.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Tapani Hyttinen (1991). Preservation by Homomorphisms and Infinitary Languages. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 32 (2):167-172.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  1
    J. -P. Ressayre (1973). Boolean Models and Infinitary First Order Languages. Annals of Mathematical Logic 6 (1):41-92.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  37.  1
    Julia F. Knight (1982). Review: J.-P. Ressayre, Boolean Models and Infinitary First Order Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (2):439-439.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Julia F. Knight (1982). Ressayre J.-P.. Boolean Models and Infinitary First Order Languages. Annals of Mathematical Logic, Vol. 6 No. 1 , Pp. 41–92. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (2):439.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  23
    H. Jerome Keisler (1971). Model Theory for Infinitary Logic. Amsterdam,North-Holland Pub. Co..
    Provability, Computability and Reflection.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   42 citations  
  40.  1
    Alexandre Martins Rodrigues & Edelcio de Souza (2011). Model Theoretical Generalization of Steinitz's Theorem. Principia 15 (1):107-110.
    Infinitary languages are used to prove that any strong isomorphism of substructures of isomorphic structures can be extended to an isomorphism of the structures. If the structures are models of a theory that has quantifier elimination, any isomorphism of substructures is strong. This theorem is a partial generalization of Steinitz’s theorem for algebraically closed fields and has as special case the analogous theorem for differentially closed fields. In this note, we announce results which will be proved elsewhere. DOI: (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  2
    George Weaver & Irena Penev (2005). From Finitary to Infinitary Second‐Order Logic. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (5):499-506.
    A back and forth condition on interpretations for those second-order languages without functional variables whose non-logical vocabulary is finite and excludes functional constants is presented. It is shown that this condition is necessary and sufficient for the interpretations to be equivalent in the language. When applied to second-order languages with an infinite non-logical vocabulary, excluding functional constants, the back and forth condition is sufficient but not necessary. It is shown that there is a class of infinitary second-order (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  42.  45
    John L. Bell, Infinitary Logic. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Traditionally, expressions in formal systems have been regarded as signifying finite inscriptions which are—at least in principle—capable of actually being written out in primitive notation. However, the fact that (first-order) formulas may be identified with natural numbers (via "Gödel numbering") and hence with finite sets makes it no longer necessary to regard formulas as inscriptions, and suggests the possibility of fashioning "languages" some of whose formulas would be naturally identified as infinite sets . A "language" of this kind is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  43.  10
    John T. Baldwin (2007). The Vaught Conjecture: Do Uncountable Models Count? Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 48 (1):79-92.
    We give a model theoretic proof, replacing admissible set theory by the Lopez-Escobar theorem, of Makkai's theorem: Every counterexample to Vaught's Conjecture has an uncountable model which realizes only countably many ℒ$_{ω₁,ω}$-types. The following result is new. Theorem: If a first-order theory is a counterexample to the Vaught Conjecture then it has 2\sp ℵ₁ models of cardinality ℵ₁.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  3
    Karl‐Heinz Diener & K.‐H. Diener (1992). On the Transitive Hull of a Κ‐Narrow Relation. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 38 (1):387-398.
    We will prove in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory without axiom of choice that the transitive hull R* of a relation R is not much “bigger” than R itself. As a measure for the size of a relation we introduce the notion of κ+-narrowness using surjective Hartogs numbers rather than the usul injective Hartogs values. The main theorem of this paper states that the transitive hull of a κ+-narrow relation is κ+-narrow. As an immediate corollary we obtain that, for every infinite cardinal (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  6
    Maaret Karttunen (1983). Model Theoretic Results for Infinitely Deep Languages. Studia Logica 42 (2-3):223 - 241.
    We define a subhierarchy of the infinitely deep languagesN described by Jaakko Hintikka and Veikko Rantala. We shall show that some model theoretic results well-known in the model theory of the ordinary infinitary languages can be generalized for these new languages. Among these are the downward Löwenheim-Skolem and o's theorems as well as some compactness properties.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Matti Linna (1970). The Set of Schemata of C-Valid Equations Between Regular Expressions is Independent of the Basic Alphabet. Turku [Finland]Turun Yliopisto.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  49
    Eric Steinhart (2003). Supermachines and Superminds. Minds and Machines 13 (1):155-186.
    If the computational theory of mind is right, then minds are realized by machines. There is an ordered complexity hierarchy of machines. Some finite machines realize finitely complex minds; some Turing machines realize potentially infinitely complex minds. There are many logically possible machines whose powers exceed the Church–Turing limit (e.g. accelerating Turing machines). Some of these supermachines realize superminds. Superminds perform cognitive supertasks. Their thoughts are formed in infinitary languages. They perceive and manipulate the infinite detail of fractal (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  48.  24
    Solomon Feferman, What Kind of Logic is “Independence Friendly” Logic?
    1. Two kinds of logic. To a first approximation there are two main kinds of pursuit in logic. The first is the traditional one going back two millennia, concerned with characterizing the logically valid inferences. The second is the one that emerged most systematically only in the twentieth century, concerned with the semantics of logical operations. In the view of modern, model-theoretical eyes, the first requires the second, but not vice-versa. According to Tarski’s generally accepted account of logical consequence, inference (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Øystein Linnebo & Agustín Rayo (2012). Hierarchies Ontological and Ideological. Mind 121 (482):269 - 308.
    Gödel claimed that Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is 'what becomes of the theory of types if certain superfluous restrictions are removed'. The aim of this paper is to develop a clearer understanding of Gödel's remark, and of the surrounding philosophical terrain. In connection with this, we discuss some technical issues concerning infinitary type theories and the programme of developing the semantics for higher-order languages in other higher-order languages.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  50.  16
    M. J. Cresswell (1973). Logics and Languages. London,Methuen [Distributed in the U.S.A. By Harper & Row.
    Originally published in 1973, this book shows that methods developed for the semantics of systems of formal logic can be successfully applied to problems about the semantics of natural languages; and, moreover, that such methods can take account of features of natural language which have often been thought incapable of formal treatment, such as vagueness, context dependence and metaphorical meaning. Parts 1 and 2 set out a class of formal languages and their semantics. Parts 3 and 4 show (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   82 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000