Enhancing induction in a contraction free logic with unrestricted abstraction: from $$\mathbf {Z}$$ to $$\mathbf {Z}_2$$

Archive for Mathematical Logic 61 (7):1007-1051 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

$$\mathbf {Z}$$ is a new type of non-finitist inference, i.e., an inference that involves treating some infinite collection as completed, designed for contraction free logic with unrestricted abstraction. It has been introduced in Petersen (Studia Logica 64:365–403, 2000) and shown to be consistent within a system $$\mathbf {{}L^iD{}}{}$$ $$_{\uplambda }$$ of contraction free logic with unrestricted abstraction. In Petersen (Arch Math Log 42(7):665–694, 2003) it was established that adding $$ \mathbf {Z}$$ to $$\mathbf {{}L^iD{}}{}$$ $$_{\uplambda }$$ is sufficient to prove the totality of primitive recursive functions but it was also indicated that this would not extend to 2-recursive functions such as the Ackermann–Péter function, for instance. The purpose of the present paper is to expand the underlying idea in the construction of $$\mathbf {Z}$$ to gain a stronger notion, conveniently labeled $$\mathbf {Z}_2$$, which is sufficient to prove a form of nested double induction and thereby the totality of 2-recursive functions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,829

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Bounding Minimal Degrees by Computably Enumerable Degrees.Angsheng Li & Dongping Yang - 1998 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (4):1319-1347.
Degrees That Are Not Degrees of Categoricity.Bernard Anderson & Barbara Csima - 2016 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 57 (3):389-398.
How to be R eally Contraction-Free.Greg Restall - 1993 - Studia Logica 52 (3):381 - 391.
Degrees joining to 0'. [REVIEW]David B. Posner & Robert W. Robinson - 1981 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 46 (4):714 - 722.
Why Intuitionistic Relevant Logic Cannot Be a Core Logic.Joseph Vidal-Rosset - 2017 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 58 (2):241-248.
Defining Relevant Implication in a Propositionally Quantified S4.Philip Kremer - 1997 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (4):1057-1069.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-08

Downloads
9 (#1,252,744)

6 months
3 (#973,855)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

L i D Z λ as a basis for PRA.Uwe Petersen - 2003 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 42 (7):665-694.
LiDZλ as a basis for PRA.Uwe Petersen - 2003 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 42 (7):665-694.
Transfinite Zahlen.Heinz Bachmann - 1959 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 24 (3):223-224.

Add more references