§1. Introduction.The motivation of this work comes from two different directions: infinite abelian groups, and ordered algebraic structures. A challenging problem in both cases is that of classification. In the first case, it is known for example (cf. [KA]) that the classification of abelian torsion groups amounts to that of reducedp-groups by numerical invariants called theUlm invariants(given by Ulm in [U]). Ulm's theorem was later generalized by P. Hill to the class of totally projective groups. As to the second case, (...) let us consider for instance the class of divisible ordered abelian groups. These may be viewed as ordered ℚ-vector spaces. Their theory being unstable, we cannot hope to classify them by numerical invariants. On the other hand, being o-minimal, the theory enjoys several good model theoretic properties (cf. [P-S]), so the search for some reasonable invariants is well motivated. The common denominator of the two cases, as well as of many others, is valuation theory. Indeed given an ordered vector space, one can consider it as a valued vector space, endowed with the natural valuation. Also, the socleG[p] of a reduced abelianp-groupG, endowed with the height functionhG, is a valued vector space over(the prime field of characteristicp) with values in the ordinals (cf. [F]). (shrink)

§1. Introduction.The motivation of this work comes from two different directions: infinite abelian groups, and ordered algebraic structures. A challenging problem in both cases is that of classification. In the first case, it is known for example (cf. [KA]) that the classification of abelian torsion groups amounts to that of reducedp-groups by numerical invariants called theUlm invariants(given by Ulm in [U]). Ulm's theorem was later generalized by P. Hill to the class of totally projective groups. As to the second case, (...) let us consider for instance the class of divisible ordered abelian groups. These may be viewed as ordered ℚ-vector spaces. Their theory being unstable, we cannot hope to classify them by numerical invariants. On the other hand, being o-minimal, the theory enjoys several good model theoretic properties (cf. [P-S]), so the search for some reasonable invariants is well motivated. The common denominator of the two cases, as well as of many others, is valuation theory. Indeed given an ordered vector space, one can consider it as a valued vector space, endowed with the natural valuation. Also, the socleG[p] of a reduced abelianp-groupG, endowed with the height functionhG, is a valued vector space over(the prime field of characteristicp) with values in the ordinals (cf. [F]). (shrink)

§0. Introduction. In [16], Barwise described his graduate study at Stanford. He told of his interactions with Kreisel and Scott, and said how he chose Feferman as his advisor. He began working on admissible fragments of infinitary logic after reading and giving seminar talks on two Ph.D. theses which had recently been completed: that of Lopez-Escobar, at Berkeley, on infinitary logic [46], and that of Platek [58], at Stanford, on admissible sets.Barwise's work on infinitary logic and admissible sets is described (...) in his thesis [4], the book [13], and papers [5]—[16]. We do not try to give a systematic review of these papers. Instead, our goal is to give a coherent introduction to infinitary logic and admissible sets. We describe results of Barwise, of course, because he did so much. In addition, we mention some more recent work, to indicate the current importance of Barwise's ideas. Many of the central results are stated without proof, but occasionally we sketch a proof, to indicate how the ideas fit together.Chapters 1 and 2 describe infinitary logic and admissible sets at the time Barwise began his work, circa 1965. From Chapter 3 on, we survey the developments that took place after Barwise appeared on the scene.§1. Background on infinitary logic. In this chapter, we describe the situation in infinitary logic at the time that Barwise began his work. We need some terminology. By a vocabulary, we mean a set L of constant symbols, and relation and operation symbols with finitely many argument places. As usual, by an L-structureM, we mean a universe set M with an interpretation for each symbol of L. (shrink)

Ulm’s Theorem presents invariants that classify countable abelian torsion groups up to isomorphism. Barwise and Eklof extended this result to the classification of arbitrary abelian torsion groups up to L∞ω\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$L_{\infty \omega }$$\end{document}-equivalence. In this paper, we extend this classification to a class of mixed Zp\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathbb {Z}}_p$$\end{document}-modules which includes all Warfield modules and is closed under L∞ω\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} (...) \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$L_{\infty \omega }$$\end{document}-equivalence. The defining property of these modules is the existence of what we call a partial decomposition basis, a generalization of the concept of decomposition basis. We prove a complete classification theorem in L∞ω\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$L_{\infty \omega }$$\end{document} using invariants deduced from the classical Ulm and Warfield invariants. (shrink)

There exists a model in a countable language having a unique element which is not definable in $\scr{L}_{\omega _{1},\omega}$.

In order to apply known general theorems about the effective properties of recursive structures in a particular recursive structure, it is necessary to verify that certain decidability conditions are satisfied. This requires the determination of when certain relations, called back and forth relations, hold between finite strings of elements from the structure. Here we determine this for recursive reduced abelian p-groups, thus enabling us to apply these theorems.