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 (...) 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— such as that in the above quotation—would be naturally identified as infinite sets. A "language" of this kind is called an infinitary language: in this article we discuss those infinitary languages which can be obtained in a straightforward manner from first-order languages by allowing conjunctions, disjunctions and, possibly, quantifier sequences, to be of infinite length. In the course of the discussion we shall see that, while the expressive power of such languages far exceeds that of their finitary (first-order) counterparts, very few of them possess the "attractive" features (e.g., compactness and completeness) of the latter. Accordingly, the infinitary languages that do in fact possess these features merit special attention. In §1 we lay down the basic syntax and semantics of infinitary languages and demonstrate their expressive power by means of examples. §2 is devoted to those infinitary languages which permit only finite quantifier sequences: these languages turn out to be relatively well-behaved. In §3 we discuss the compactness problem for infinitary languages and its.. (shrink)

We provide the syntactic equivalent for the theorem stating that all epimorphisms of finite projective planes are isomorphisms. The definition of the inequality relation that we provide adds little to our understanding of the theorem, since its very validity can be discerned only from the validity of the model-theoretic theorem regarding epimorphisms.

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.

We start by giving a survey to the theory of $${\text {Borel}}^{*}$$ sets in the generalized Baire space $${\text {Baire}}=\kappa ^{\kappa }$$. In particular we look at the relation of this complexity class to other complexity classes which we denote by $${\text {Borel}}$$, $${\Delta _1^1}$$ and $${\Sigma _1^1}$$ and the connections between $${\text {Borel}}^*$$ sets and the infinitely deep language $$M_{\kappa ^+\kappa }$$. In the end of the paper we will prove the consistency of $${\text {Borel}}^{*}\ne \Sigma ^{1}_{1}$$.

We start by giving a survey to the theory of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text {Borel}}^{*}$$\end{document} sets in the generalized Baire space \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text {Baire}}=\kappa ^{\kappa }$$\end{document}. In particular we look at the relation of this complexity class to other complexity classes which we denote by \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text {Borel}}$$\end{document}, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Delta _1^1}$$\end{document} (...) and \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Sigma _1^1}$$\end{document} and the connections between \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text {Borel}}^*$$\end{document} sets and the infinitely deep language \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$M_{\kappa ^+\kappa }$$\end{document}. In the end of the paper we will prove the consistency of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text {Borel}}^{*}\ne \Sigma ^{1}_{1}$$\end{document}. (shrink)

Analogues of Scott's isomorphism theorem, Karp's theorem as well as results on lack of compactness and strong completeness are established for infinitary propositional relevant logics. An "interpolation theorem" for the infinitary quantificational boolean logic L-infinity omega. holds. This yields a preservation result characterizing the expressive power of infinitary relevant languages with absurdity using the model-theoretic relation of relevant directed bisimulation as well as a Beth definability property.

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 (...) called an infinitary language : in this article I discuss those infinitary languages which can be obtained in a straightforward manner from first-order languages by allowing conjunctions, disjunctions and, possibly, quantifier sequences, to be of infinite length. In the course of the discussion it will be seen that, while the expressive power of such languages far exceeds that of their finitary (first-order) counterparts, very few of them possess the "attractive" features (e.g., compactness and completeness) of the latter. Accordingly, the infinitary languages that do in fact possess these features merit special attention. (shrink)

López-Escobar, E. G. K. Introduction.--Kueker, D. W. Back-and-forth arguments and infinitary logics.--Green, J. Consistency properties for finite quantifier languages.--Cunningham, E. Chain models.--Gregory, J. On a finiteness condition for infinitary languages.

This book is the first modern introduction to the logic of infinitary languages in forty years, and is aimed at graduate students and researchers in all areas of mathematical logic. Connections between infinitary model theory and other branches of mathematical logic, and applications to algebra and algebraic geometry are both comprehensively explored.

Provability, Computability and Reflection.

We can measure the complexity of a logical formula by counting the number of alternations between existential and universal quantifiers. Suppose that an elementary first-order formula $\varphi $ (in $\mathcal {L}_{\omega,\omega }$ ) is equivalent to a formula of the infinitary language $\mathcal {L}_{\infty,\omega }$ with n alternations of quantifiers. We prove that $\varphi $ is equivalent to a finitary formula with n alternations of quantifiers. Thus using infinitary logic does not allow us to express a finitary formula (...) in a simpler way. (shrink)

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 (...) the random graph on n vertices converges. In fact, if $p(n) = n^{-\alpha}, \alpha > 1$ , then the probability is either smaller than 2 -n d for some $d > 0$ , or it is asymptotic to cn -d for some $c > 0, d \geq 0$ . Results on the difficulty of computing the asymptotic probability are given. (shrink)

It is known that a theory in S5‐epistemic logic with several agents may have numerous models. This is because each such model specifies also what an agent knows about infinite intersections of events, while the expressive power of the logic is limited to finite conjunctions of formulas. We show that this asymmetry between syntax and semantics persists also when infinite conjunctions (up to some given cardinality) are permitted in the language. We develop a strengthened S5‐axiomatic system for such infinitary (...) logics, and prove a strong completeness theorem for them. Then we show that in every such logic there is always a theory with more than one model. (shrink)

In this paper we mainly study preservation theorems for two fragments of the infinitary languagesLκκ, withκregular, without the equality symbol: the universal Horn fragment and the universal strict Horn fragment. In particular, whenκisω, we obtain the corresponding theorems for the first-order case.The universal Horn fragment of first-order logic (with equality) has been extensively studied; for references see [10], [7] and [8]. But the universal Horn fragment without equality, used frequently in logic programming, has received much less attention from the (...) model theoretic point of view. At least to our knowledge, the problem of obtaining preservation results for it has not been studied before by model theorists. In spite of this, in the field of abstract algebraic logic we find a theorem which, properly translated, is a preservation result for the strict universal Horn fragment of infinitary languages without equality which, apart from function symbols, have only a unary relation symbol. This theorem is due to J. Czelakowski; see [5], Theorem 6.1, and [6], Theorem 5.1. A. Torrens [12] also has an unpublished result dealing with matrices of sequent calculi which, properly translated, is a preservation result for the strict universal Horn fragment of a first-order language. And in [2] of W. J. Blok and D. Pigozzi we find Corollary 6.3 which properly translated corresponds to our Corollary 19, but for the case of a first-order language that apart from its function symbols has only oneκ-ary relation symbol, and for strict universal Horn sentences. The study of these results is the basis for the present work. In the last part of the paper, Section 4, we will make these connections clear and obtain some of these results from our theorems. In this way we hope to make clear two things: (1) The field of abstract algebraic logic can be seen, in part, as a disguised study of universal Horn logic without equality and so has an added interest. (2) A general study of universal Horn logic without equality from a model theoretic point of view can be of help in the field of abstract algebraic logic. (shrink)

For each regular cardinal κ, 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 $\Sigma _{}$, the global system $\text{g}\Sigma _{}$ and the τ-system $\tau \Sigma _{}$. A full cut elimination theorem is proved for the local systems, and about the τ-systems we prove that they admit cut-free proofs for sequents in the τ-free language common to the local and global systems. These two (...) results follow from semantic completeness proofs. Thus every sequent provable in a global system has a cut-free proof in the corresponding τ-systems. It is, however, an open question whether the global systems in themselves admit cut elimination. (shrink)

In recent years much effort has gone into the study of languages which strengthen the classical first-order predicate calculus in various ways. This effort has been motivated by the desire to find a language which is(I) strong enough to express interesting properties not expressible by the classical language, but(II) still simple enough to yield interesting general results. Languages investigated include second-order logic, weak second-order logic, ω-logic, languages with generalized quantifiers, and infinitary logic.

We develop a series of small infinitary epistemic logics to study deductive inference involving intra-/interpersonal beliefs/knowledge such as common knowledge, common beliefs, and infinite regress of beliefs. Specifically, propositional epistemic logics GL are presented for ordinal α up to a given αo so that GL is finitary KDn with n agents and GL allows conjunctions of certain countably infinite formulae. GL is small in that the language is countable and can be constructive. The set of formulae Lα is increasing (...) up to α = ω but stops at ω We present Kripke-completeness for GL for each α ≤ ω, which is proved using the Rasiowa–Sikorski lemma and Tanaka–Ono lemma. GL has a sufficient expressive power to discuss intra-/interpersonal beliefs with infinite lengths. As applications, we discuss the explicit definability of Axioms T, 4, 5, and of common knowledge in GL Also, we discuss the rationalizability concept in game theory in our framework. We evaluate where these discussions are done in the series GL, α ≤ ω. (shrink)