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

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. M. A. Dickmann (1975). Large Infinitary Languages: Model Theory. American Elsevier Pub. Co..score: 210.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. M. A. Dickmann (1970). Model Theory of Infinitary Languages. [Aarhus, Denmark,Universitet, Matematisk Institut].score: 210.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Herman Ruge Jervell (1972). Herbrand and Skolem Theorems in Infinitary Languages. Oslo,Universitetet I Oslo, Matematisk Institutt.score: 210.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Attila Máté (1971). Incompactness in Infinitary Languages with Respect to Boolean-Valued Interpretations. Szeged,University of Szeged Bolyai Mathematical Institute.score: 210.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. John Bell, Infinitary Languages.score: 180.0
    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 (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Kenneth Kunen (1968). Implicit Definability and Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 33 (3):446-451.score: 150.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. John Gregory (1974). Beth Definability in Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (1):22-26.score: 150.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. 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.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jaakko Hintikka & Veikko Rantala (1976). A New Approach to Infinitary Languages. Annals of Mathematical Logic 10 (1):95-115.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Jean‐Pierre Calais (1972). Partial Isomorphisms and Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 18 (25‐30):435-456.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Karl‐Heinz Diener (1983). On Constructing Infinitary Languages Lα Β Without the Axiom of Choice. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 29 (6):357-376.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Jörg Flum (1971). A Remark on Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 36 (3):461-462.score: 150.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Anders M. Nyberg (1976). Uniform Inductive Definability and Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 41 (1):109-120.score: 150.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Carol Wood (1972). Forcing for Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 18 (25‐30):385-402.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Jon Barwise (1968). Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 72:1--35.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. C. C. Chang (1972). Review: Jorg Flum, A Remark on Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):764-764.score: 150.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Newton C. A. da Costa & Charles C. Pinter (1976). Α Logic and Infinitary Languages. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 22 (1):105-112.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Jorg Flum (1974). Review: Jerome Malitz, Universal Classes in Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 39 (2):336-336.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar (1970). Review: Kenneth Kunen, Implicit Definability and Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (2):341-342.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Mihaly Makkai (1972). Review: Jon Barwise, Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (1):201-202.score: 150.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Michael Makkai (1978). Review: M. A. Dickmann, Large Infinitary Languages. Model Theory. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 43 (1):144-145.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Gonzalo E. Reyes (1972). Lω₁Ω is Enough: A Reduction Theorem for Some Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):705-710.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Gonzalo E. Reyes (1972). $L{Omega1omega}$ is Enough: A Reduction Theorem for Some Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):705-710.score: 150.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Saharon Shelah (1973). Weak Definability in Infinitary Languages. Journal of Symbolic Logic 38 (3):399-404.score: 150.0
    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 (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Tapani Hyttinen (1991). Preservation by Homomorphisms and Infinitary Languages. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 32 (2):167-172.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Julia F. Knight (1982). Review: J.-P. Ressayre, Boolean Models and Infinitary First Order Languages. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (2):439-439.score: 120.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. J. -P. Ressayre (1973). Boolean Models and Infinitary First Order Languages. Annals of Mathematical Logic 6 (1):41-92.score: 120.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. H. Jerome Keisler (1971). Model Theory for Infinitary Logic. Amsterdam,North-Holland Pub. Co..score: 90.0
    Provability, Computability and Reflection.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Alexandre Martins Rodrigues & Edelcio de Souza (2011). Model Theoretical Generalization of Steinitz's Theorem. Principia 15 (1):107-110.score: 90.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Victor Pambuccian (2002). On Definitions in an Infinitary Language. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 48 (4):522-524.score: 84.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. John L. Bell, Infinitary Logic. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.score: 60.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. John T. Baldwin (2007). The Vaught Conjecture: Do Uncountable Models Count? Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 48 (1):79-92.score: 60.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Maaret Karttunen (1983). Model Theoretic Results for Infinitely Deep Languages. Studia Logica 42 (2-3):223 - 241.score: 60.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar (1967). Remarks on an Infinitary Language with Constructive Formulas. Journal of Symbolic Logic 32 (3):305-318.score: 60.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Karl‐Heinz Diener & K.‐H. Diener (1992). On the Transitive Hull of a Κ‐Narrow Relation. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 38 (1):387-398.score: 60.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Erwin Engeler (1969). Review: E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar, An Interpolation Theorem for Denumerably Long Formulas; E. G. K. Lopez-Escobar, Universal Formulas in the Infinitary Language $L_{Alpha Beta}$. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 34 (2):301-302.score: 60.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Matti Linna (1970). The Set of Schemata of C-Valid Equations Between Regular Expressions is Independent of the Basic Alphabet. Turku [Finland]Turun Yliopisto.score: 60.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Miklós Ferenczi (2009). On Conservative Extensions in Logics with Infinitary Predicates. Studia Logica 92 (1):121 - 135.score: 38.0
    If the language is extended by new individual variables, in classical first order logic, then the deduction system obtained is a conservative extension of the original one. This fails to be true for the logics with infinitary predicates. But it is shown that restricting the commutativity of quantifiers and the equality axioms in the extended system and supposing the merry-go-round property in the original system, the foregoing extension is already conservative. It is shown that these restrictions are crucial for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. James F. Lynch (1997). Infinitary Logics and Very Sparse Random Graphs. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (2):609-623.score: 32.0
    Let L ω ∞ω be the infinitary language obtained from the first-order language of graphs by closure under conjunctions and disjunctions of arbitrary sets of formulas, provided only finitely many distinct variables occur among the formulas. Let p(n) be the edge probability of the random graph on n vertices. It is shown that if p(n) ≪ n -1 satisfies certain simple conditions on its growth rate, then for every σ∈ L ω ∞ω , the probability that σ holds for (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Eric Steinhart (2003). Supermachines and Superminds. Minds and Machines 13 (1):155-186.score: 30.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Solomon Feferman, What Kind of Logic is “Independence Friendly” Logic?score: 30.0
    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 (1936), (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. J. W. Degen (1999). Complete Infinitary Type Logics. Studia Logica 63 (1):85-119.score: 30.0
    For each regular cardinal , we set up three systems of infinitary type logic, in which the length of the types and the length of the typed syntactical constructs are . For a fixed , these three versions are, in the order of increasing strength: the local system (), the global system g() (the difference concerns the conditions on eigenvariables) and the -system () (which has anti-selection terms or Hilbertian -terms, and no conditions on eigenvariables). A full cut elimination (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Johan Van Benthem & Jan Bergstra (1994). Logic of Transition Systems. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (4):247-283.score: 26.0
    Labeled transition systems are key structures for modeling computation. In this paper, we show how they lend themselves to ordinary logical analysis (without any special new formalisms), by introducing their standard first-order theory. This perspective enables us to raise several basic model-theoretic questions of definability, axiomatization and preservation for various notions of process equivalence found in the computational literature, and answer them using well-known logical techniques (including the Compactness theorem, Saturation and Ehrenfeucht games). Moreover, we consider what happens to this (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Johan Benthem & Jan Bergstra (1994). Logic of Transition Systems. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (4):247-283.score: 26.0
    Labeled transition systems are key structures for modeling computation. In this paper, we show how they lend themselves to ordinary logical analysis (without any special new formalisms), by introducing their standard first-order theory. This perspective enables us to raise several basic model-theoretic questions of definability, axiomatization and preservation for various notions of process equivalence found in the computational literature, and answer them using well-known logical techniques (including the Compactness theorem, Saturation and Ehrenfeucht games). Moreover, we consider what happens to this (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Patrick Blackburn & Jerry Seligman (1995). Hybrid Languages. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4 (3):251-272.score: 25.0
    Hybrid languages have both modal and first-order characteristics: a Kripke semantics, and explicit variable binding apparatus. This paper motivates the development of hybrid languages, sketches their history, and examines the expressive power of three hybrid binders. We show that all three binders give rise to languages strictly weaker than the corresponding first-order language, that full first-order expressivity can be gained by adding the universal modality, and that all three binders can force the existence of infinite models and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Tore Langholm (2006). A Descriptive Characterisation of Linear Languages. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 15 (3):233-250.score: 25.0
    Lautemann et al. (1995) gave a descriptive characterisation of the class of context-free languages, showing that a language is context-free iff it is definable as the set of words satisfying some sentence of a particular logic (fragment) over words. The present notes discuss how to specialise this result to the class of linear languages. Somewhat surprisingly, what would seem the most straightforward specialisation actually fails, due to the fact that linear grammars fail to admit a Greibach normal form. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. András Kornai (2011). Probabilistic Grammars and Languages. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 20 (3):317-328.score: 25.0
    Using an asymptotic characterization of probabilistic finite state languages over a one-letter alphabet we construct a probabilistic language with regular support that cannot be generated by probabilistic CFGs. Since all probability values used in the example are rational, our work is immune to the criticism leveled by Suppes (Synthese 22:95–116, 1970 ) against the work of Ellis ( 1969 ) who first constructed probabilistic FSLs that admit no probabilistic FSGs. Some implications for probabilistic language modeling by HMMs are discussed.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Brian R. Gaines (2009). Designing Visual Languages for Description Logics. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 18 (2):217-250.score: 25.0
    Semantic networks were developed in cognitive science and artificial intelligence studies as graphical knowledge representation and inference tools emulating human thought processes. Formal analysis of the representation and inference capabilities of the networks modeled them as subsets of standard first-order logic (FOL), restricted in the operations allowed in order to ensure the tractability that seemed to characterize human reasoning capabilities. The graphical network representations were modeled as providing a visual language for the logic. Sub-sets of FOL targeted on knowledge representation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Tobias Kuhn (2013). A Principled Approach to Grammars for Controlled Natural Languages and Predictive Editors. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 22 (1):33-70.score: 25.0
    Controlled natural languages (CNL) with a direct mapping to formal logic have been proposed to improve the usability of knowledge representation systems, query interfaces, and formal specifications. Predictive editors are a popular approach to solve the problem that CNLs are easy to read but hard to write. Such predictive editors need to be able to “look ahead” in order to show all possible continuations of a given unfinished sentence. Such lookahead features, however, are difficult to implement in a satisfying (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Xinli Wang (2003). Presuppositional Languages and the Failure of Cross-Language Understanding. Dialogue 42 (01):53-77.score: 24.0
    Why is mutual understanding between two substantially different comprehensive language communities often problematic and even unattainable? To answer this question, the author first introduces a notion of presuppositional languages. Based on the semantic structure of a presuppositional language, the author identifies a significant condition necessary for effective understanding of a language: the interpreter is able to effectively understand a language only if he/she is able to recognize and comprehend its metaphysical presuppositions. The essential role of the knowledge of metaphysical (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000