Some quantitative results obtained by proof mining take the form of Herbrand disjunctions that may depend on additional parameters. We attempt to elucidate this fact through an extension to first-order arithmetic of the proof of Herbrand’s theorem due to Gerhardy and Kohlenbach which uses the functional interpretation.

Herbrand's Theorem, in the form of $$\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\exists } $$ -inversion lemmata for finitary and infinitary sequent calculi, is the crucial tool for the determination of the provably total function(al)s of a variety of theories. The theories are (second order extensions of) fragments of classical arithmetic; the classes of provably total functions include the elements of the Polynomial Hierarchy, the Grzegorczyk Hierarchy, and the extended Grzegorczyk Hierarchy $\mathfrak{E}^\alpha $ , α < ε0. A subsidiary aim of the paper is to show (...) that the proof theoretic methods used here are distinguished by technical elegance, conceptual clarity, and wide-ranging applicability. (shrink)

We establish by elementary proof-theoretic means the conservativeness of two subsystems of analysis over primitive recursive arithmetic. The one subsystem was introduced by Friedman [6], the other is a strengthened version of a theory of Minc [14]; each has been shown to be of considerable interest for both mathematical practice and metamathematical investigations. The foundational significance of such conservation results is clear: they provide a direct finitist justification of the part of mathematical practice formalizable in these subsystems. The results are (...) generalized to relate a hierarchy of subsystems, all contained in the theory of arithmetic properties, to a corresponding hierarchy of fragments of arithmetic. The proof theoretic tools employed there are used to re-establish in a uniform, elementary way relationships between various fragments of arithmetic due to Parsons, Paris and Kirby, and Friedman. (shrink)

We will apply the methods developed in the field of ‘proof mining’ to the Bolzano-Weierstraß theorem BW and calibrate the computational contribution of using this theorem in proofs of combinatorial statements. We provide an explicit solution of the Gödel functional interpretation as well as the monotone functional interpretation of BW for the product space Πi ∈ℕ[–ki, ki] . This results in optimal program and bound extraction theorems for proofs based on fixed instances of BW, i.e. for BW applied to fixed (...) sequences in Πi ∈ℕ[–ki, ki]. (shrink)

It is well known by now that large parts of mathematical reasoning can be carried out in systems which are conservative over primitive recursive arithmetic PRA . On the other hand there are principles S of elementary analysis which are known to be equivalent to arithmetical comprehension and therefore go far beyond the strength of PRA . In this paper we determine precisely the arithmetical and computational strength of weaker function parameter-free schematic versions S− of S, thereby exhibiting different levels (...) of strength between these principles as well as a sharp borderline between fragments of analysis which are still conservative over PRA and extensions which just go beyond the strength of PRA. (shrink)

LetA H be the Herbrand normal form ofA andA H,D a Herbrand realization ofA H. We showThere is an example of an (open) theory ℐ+ with function parameters such that for someA not containing function parameters Similar for first order theories ℐ+ if the index functions used in definingA H are permitted to occur in instances of non-logical axiom schemata of ℐ, i.e. for suitable ℐ,A In fact, in (1) we can take for ℐ+ the fragment (Σ 1 0 -IA)+ (...) of second order arithmetic with induction restricted toΣ 1 0 -formulas, and in (2) we can take for ℐ the fragment (Σ 1 0,b -IA) of first order arithmetic with induction restricted to formulas VxA(x) whereA contains only bounded quantifiers.On the other hand, $$PA^2 \vdash A^H \Rightarrow PA \vdash A,$$ wherePA 2 is the extension of first order arithmeticPA obtained by adding quantifiers for functions andA∈ℒ(PA). This generalizes to extensional arithmetic in the language of all finite types but not to sentencesA with positively occurring existential quantifiers for functions. (shrink)

In this paper the numerical strength of fragments of arithmetical comprehension, choice and general uniform boundedness is studied systematically. These principles are investigated relative to base systems Tnω in all finite types which are suited to formalize substantial parts of analysis but nevertheless have provably recursive functions of low growth. We reduce the use of instances of these principles in Tnω-proofs of a large class of formulas to the use of instances of certain arithmetical principles thereby determining faithfully the arithmetical (...) content of the former. This is achieved using the method of elimination of Skolem functions for monotone formulas which was introduced by the author in a previous paper.As corollaries we obtain new conservation results for fragments of analysis over fragments of arithmetic which strengthen known purely first-order conservation results.We also characterize the provably recursive functions of type 2 of the extensions of Tnω based on these fragments of arithmetical comprehension, choice and uniform boundedness. (shrink)

It is well-known (due to C. Parsons) that the extension of primitive recursive arithmeticPRA by first-order predicate logic and the rule ofΠ 2 0 -inductionΠ 2 0 -IR isΠ 2 0 -conservative overPRA. We show that this is no longer true in the presence of function quantifiers and quantifier-free choice for numbersAC 0,0-qf. More precisely we show that ℐ :=PRA 2 +Π 2 0 -IR+AC 0,0-qf proves the totality of the Ackermann function, wherePRA 2 is the extension ofPRA by number (...) and function quantifiers andΠ 2 0 -IR may contain function parameters. This is true even forPRA 2 +∑ 1 0 -IR+Π 2 0 -IR −+AC 0,0-qf, whereΠ 2 0 -IR − is the restriction ofΠ 2 0 -IR without function parameters. (shrink)

It is well-known (due to C. Parsons) that the extension of primitive recursive arithmeticPRA by first-order predicate logic and the rule ofΠ 2 0 -inductionΠ 2 0 -IR isΠ 2 0 -conservative overPRA. We show that this is no longer true in the presence of function quantifiers and quantifier-free choice for numbersAC 0,0-qf. More precisely we show that ℐ :=PRA 2 +Π 2 0 -IR+AC 0,0-qf proves the totality of the Ackermann function, wherePRA 2 is the extension ofPRA by number (...) and function quantifiers andΠ 2 0 -IR may contain function parameters.This is true even forPRA 2 +∑ 1 0 -IR+Π 2 0 -IR −+AC 0,0-qf, whereΠ 2 0 -IR − is the restriction ofΠ 2 0 -IR without function parameters. (shrink)

I argue for the use of the adjunction operator (adding a single new element to an existing set) as a basis for building a finitary set theory. It allows a simplified axiomatization for the first-order theory of hereditarily finite sets based on an induction schema and a rigorous characterization of the primitive recursive set functions. The latter leads to a primitive recursive presentation of arithmetical operations on finite sets.

In this paper we carry out a comparative study of $\mathrm{I}\Sigma_1$ and PRA. We will in a sense fully determine what these theories have to say about each other in terms of provability and interpretability. Our study will result in two arithmetically complete modal logics with simple universal models.

In this paper we will state and prove some comparative theorems concerning PRA and IΣ1. We shall provide a characterization of IΣ1 in terms of PRA and iterations of a class of functions. In particular, we prove that for this class of functions the difference between IΣ1 and PRA is exactly that, where PRA is closed under iterations of these functions, IΣ1 is moreover provably closed under iteration. We will formulate a sufficient condition for a model of PRA to be (...) a model of IΣ1. This condition is used to give a model-theoretic proof of Parsons’ theorem, that is, IΣ1 is Π2-conservative over PRA. We shall also give a purely syntactical proof of Parsons’ theorem. Finally, we show that IΣ1 proves the consistency of PRA on a definable IΣ1-cut. This implies that proofs in IΣ1 can have non-elementary speed up over proofs in PRA. (shrink)

The provability logic of a theory $T$ is the set of modal formulas, which under any arithmetical realization are provable in $T$. We slightly modify this notion by requiring the arithmetical realizations to come from a specified set $\Gamma$. We make an analogous modification for interpretability logics. We first study provability logics with restricted realizations and show that for various natural candidates of $T$ and restriction set $\Gamma$, the result is the logic of linear frames. However, for the theory Primitive (...) Recursive Arithmetic (PRA), we define a fragment that gives rise to a more interesting provability logic by capitalizing on the well-studied relationship between PRA and I$\Sigma_1$. We then study interpretability logics, obtaining upper bounds for IL(PRA), whose characterization remains a major open question in interpretability logic. Again this upper bound is closely related to linear frames. The technique is also applied to yield the nontrivial result that IL(PRA) $\subset$ ILM. (shrink)

We define a class of functions, the descent recursive functions, relative to an arbitrary elementary recursive system of ordinal notations. By means of these functions, we provide a general technique for measuring the proof-theoretic strength of a variety of systems of first-order arithmetic. We characterize the provable well-orderings and provably recursive functions of these systems, and derive various conservation and equiconsistency results.

We present a new functional interpretation, based on a novel assignment of formulas. In contrast with Gödel’s functional “Dialectica” interpretation, the new interpretation does not care for precise witnesses of existential statements, but only for bounds for them. New principles are supported by our interpretation, including the FAN theorem, weak König’s lemma and the lesser limited principle of omniscience. Conspicuous among these principles are also refutations of some laws of classical logic. Notwithstanding, we end up discussing some applications of the (...) new interpretation to theories of classical arithmetic and analysis. (shrink)

Let be the fragment of elementary Peano arithmetic in which induction is restricted to -formulas. More than three decades ago, Parsons showed that the provably total functions of are exactly the primitive recursive functions. In this paper, we observe that Parsons' result is a consequence of Herbrand's theorem concerning the -consequences of universal theories. We give a self-contained proof requiring only basic knowledge of mathematical logic.

We employ the lens provided by formal truth theory to study axiomatizations of Peano Arithmetic ${\textsf {(PA)}}$. More specifically, let Elementary Arithmetic ${\textsf {(EA)}}$ be the fragment $\mathsf {I}\Delta _0 + \mathsf {Exp}$ of ${\textsf {PA}}$, and let ${\textsf {CT}}^-[{\textsf {EA}}]$ be the extension of ${\textsf {EA}}$ by the commonly studied axioms of compositional truth ${\textsf {CT}}^-$. We investigate both local and global properties of the family of first order theories of the form ${\textsf {CT}}^-[{\textsf {EA}}] +\alpha $, where $\alpha (...) $ is a particular way of expressing “ ${\textsf {PA}}$ is true” (using the truth predicate). Our focus is dominantly on two types of axiomatizations, namely: (1) schematic axiomatizations that are deductively equivalent to ${\textsf {PA}}$ and (2) axiomatizations that are proof-theoretically equivalent to the canonical axiomatization of ${\textsf {PA}}$. (shrink)

This paper investigates the status of the fragments of Peano Arithmetic obtained by restricting induction, collection and least number axiom schemes to formulas which are Δ1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Delta_1}$$\end{document} provably in an arithmetic theory T. In particular, we determine the provably total computable functions of this kind of theories. As an application, we obtain a reduction of the problem whether IΔ0+¬exp\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${I\Delta_0 + \neg \mathit{exp}}$$\end{document} implies BΣ1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} (...) \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${B\Sigma_1}$$\end{document} to a purely recursion-theoretic question. (shrink)

We characterize the sets of all Π2 and all equation image theorems of IΠ−1 in terms of restricted exponentiation, and use these characterizations to prove that both sets are not deductively equivalent. We also discuss how these results generalize to n > 0. As an application, we prove that a conservation theorem of Beklemishev stating that IΠ−n + 1 is conservative over IΣ−n with respect to equation image sentences cannot be extended to Πn + 2 sentences. © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag (...) GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim. (shrink)

In “Some Remarks on Extending and Interpreting Theories with a Partial Truth Predicate”, Reinhardt [21] famously proposed an instrumentalist interpretation of the truth theory Kripke–Feferman ( $\mathrm {KF}$ ) in analogy to Hilbert’s program. Reinhardt suggested to view $\mathrm {KF}$ as a tool for generating “the significant part of $\mathrm {KF}$ ”, that is, as a tool for deriving sentences of the form $\mathrm{Tr}\ulcorner {\varphi }\urcorner $. The constitutive question of Reinhardt’s program was whether it was possible “to justify the (...) use of nonsignificant sentences entirely within the framework of significant sentences”. This question was answered negatively by Halbach & Horsten [10] but we argue that under a more careful interpretation the question may receive a positive answer. To this end, we propose to shift attention from $\mathrm {KF}$ -provably true sentences to $\mathrm {KF}$ -provably true inferences, that is, we shall identify the significant part of $\mathrm {KF}$ with the set of pairs $\langle {\Gamma, \Delta }\rangle $, such that $\mathrm {KF}$ proves that if all members of $\Gamma $ are true, at least one member of $\Delta $ is true. In way of addressing Reinhardt’s question we show that the provably true inferences of suitable $\mathrm {KF}$ -like theories coincide with the provable sequents of matching versions of the theory Partial Kripke–Feferman ( $\mathrm {PKF}$ ). (shrink)

A well-known result states that, over basic Kalmar elementary arithmetic EA, the induction schema for ∑n formulas is equivalent to the uniform reflection principle for ∑n + 1 formulas . We show that fragments of arithmetic axiomatized by various forms of induction rules admit a precise axiomatization in terms of reflection principles as well. Thus, the closure of EA under the induction rule for ∑n formulas is equivalent to ω times iterated ∑n reflection principle. Moreover, for k < ω, k (...) times iterated ∑n reflection principle over EA precisely corresponds to the extension of EA by k nested applications of ∑n induction rule.The above relationship holds in greater generality than just stated. In fact, we give general formulas characterizing in terms of iterated reflection principles the extension of any given theory by k nested applications of ∑n or Πn induction rules. In particular, the closure of a theory T under just one application of ∑1 induction rule is equivalent to T together with ∑1 reflection principle for each finite Π2 axiomatized subtheory of T.These results have closely parallel ones in the theory of subrecursive function classes. The rules under study correspond, in a canonical way, to natural closure operators on the classes of provably recursive functions. Thus, ∑1 induction rule precisely corresponds to the primitive recursive closure operator, and ∑1 collection rule, introduced below, corresponds to the elementary closure operator. (shrink)