In this paper we study abstract elementary classes of modules. We give several characterizations of when the class of modules A with is abstract elementary class with respect to the notion that M1 is a strong submodel M2 if the quotient remains in the given class.

We use the Drozd-Warfield structure theorem for finitely presented modules over a serial ring to investigate the model theory of modules over a serial ring, in particular, to give a simple description of pp-formulas and to classify the pure-injective indecomposable modules. We also study the question of whether every pure-injective indecomposable module over a valuation ring is the hull of a uniserial module.

We study the relations between abelian groups B and C that every universal (resp. universal-existential) sentence true in B is also true in C, and give algebraic criteria for these relations to hold. As a consequence we characterize the inductive complete theories of abelian groups and prove that they are exactly the model-complete theories.

The underlying modules of existentially closed ▵-algebras are studied. Among other things, it is proved that they are all elementarily equivalent, and that all of them are existentially closed as modules if and only if ▵ is regular. It is also proved that every saturated module in the appropriate elementary equivalence class underlies an e.c. ▵-algebra. Applications to some problems in module theory are given. A number of open questions are mentioned.

Introduction. This survey is intended to introduce to logicians some notions, methods and theorems in set theory which arose—largely through the work of Saharon Shelah—out of attempts to solve problems in abelian group theory, principally the Whitehead problem and the closely related problem of the existence of almost free abelian groups. While Shelah's first independence result regarding the Whitehead problem used established set-theoretical methods, his later work required new ideas; it is on these that we focus. We emphasize the nature (...) of the new ideas and the historical context in which they arose, and we do not attempt to give precise technical definitions in all cases, nor to include a comprehensive survey of the algebraic results.In fact, very little algebraic background is needed beyond the definitions of group and group homomorphism. Unless otherwise specified, we will use the word “group” to refer to an abelian group, that is, the group operation is commutative. The group operation will be denoted by +, the identity element by 0, and the inverse of a by −a. We shall use na as an abbreviation for a + a + … + a [n times] if n is positive, and na = if n is negative. (shrink)