Conservative extension: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Tule-hog
m See also: rm lk in main article
 
imported>KinataKnight
 
Line 21: Line 21:
* Extensions by unconstrained predicate or function symbols are conservative.
* Extensions by unconstrained predicate or function symbols are conservative.
* <math>I\Sigma_1</math> (a subsystem of Peano arithmetic with induction only for [[arithmetical hierarchy|<math>\Sigma^0_1</math>-formulas]]) is a <math>\Pi^0_2</math>-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{PRA}</math>.<ref>[https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdfview_1/euclid.ndjfl/1107220675A Fernando Ferreira, A Simple Proof of Parsons' Theorem. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Vol.46, No.1, 2005.]</ref>
* <math>I\Sigma_1</math> (a subsystem of Peano arithmetic with induction only for [[arithmetical hierarchy|<math>\Sigma^0_1</math>-formulas]]) is a <math>\Pi^0_2</math>-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{PRA}</math>.<ref>[https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdfview_1/euclid.ndjfl/1107220675A Fernando Ferreira, A Simple Proof of Parsons' Theorem. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Vol.46, No.1, 2005.]</ref>
* <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math> is a [[analytical hierarchy|<math>\Sigma^1_3</math>]]-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{ZF}</math> by [[absoluteness (mathematical logic)|Shoenfield's absoluteness theorem]].
* <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math> is a [[analytical hierarchy|<math>\Pi^1_4</math>]]-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{ZF}</math> by [[absoluteness (mathematical logic)|Shoenfield's absoluteness theorem]].<ref>Michael Rathjen, Power Kripke-Platek set theory and the axiom of choice. Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol.30, No.1, 2018.</ref>
* <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math> with the [[continuum hypothesis]] is a <math>\Pi^2_1</math>-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math>.{{Citation needed|date=March 2021}}
* <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math> with the [[generalized continuum hypothesis]] is a <math>\Pi^2_1</math>-conservative extension of <math>\mathsf{ZFC}</math>.<ref>Richard Platek, Eliminating the continuum hypothesis. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol.36, No.1, 1969.</ref>


==Model-theoretic conservative extension==
==Model-theoretic conservative extension==

Latest revision as of 06:02, 22 June 2025

Template:Short description In mathematical logic, a conservative extension is a supertheory of a theory which is often convenient for proving theorems, but proves no new theorems about the language of the original theory. Similarly, a non-conservative extension is a supertheory which is not conservative, and can prove more theorems than the original.

More formally stated, a theory T2 is a (proof theoretic) conservative extension of a theory T1 if every theorem of T1 is a theorem of T2, and any theorem of T2 in the language of T1 is already a theorem of T1.

More generally, if Γ is a set of formulas in the common language of T1 and T2, then T2 is Γ-conservative over T1 if every formula from Γ provable in T2 is also provable in T1.

Note that a conservative extension of a consistent theory is consistent. If it were not, then by the principle of explosion, every formula in the language of T2 would be a theorem of T2, so every formula in the language of T1 would be a theorem of T1, so T1 would not be consistent. Hence, conservative extensions do not bear the risk of introducing new inconsistencies. This can also be seen as a methodology for writing and structuring large theories: start with a theory, T0, that is known (or assumed) to be consistent, and successively build conservative extensions T1, T2, ... of it.

Recently, conservative extensions have been used for defining a notion of module for ontologiesScript error: No such module "Unsubst".: if an ontology is formalized as a logical theory, a subtheory is a module if the whole ontology is a conservative extension of the subtheory.

An extension which is not conservative may be called a proper extension.

Examples

Model-theoretic conservative extension

Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". With model-theoretic means, a stronger notion is obtained: an extension T2 of a theory T1 is model-theoretically conservative if T1T2 and every model of T1 can be expanded to a model of T2. Each model-theoretic conservative extension also is a (proof-theoretic) conservative extension in the above sense.[5] The model theoretic notion has the advantage over the proof theoretic one that it does not depend so much on the language at hand; on the other hand, it is usually harder to establish model theoretic conservativity.

See also

References

Template:Reflist

External links

Template:Mathematical logic

  1. a b S. G. Simpson, R. L. Smith, "Factorization of polynomials and Σ10-induction" (1986). Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 31 (p.305)
  2. Fernando Ferreira, A Simple Proof of Parsons' Theorem. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Vol.46, No.1, 2005.
  3. Michael Rathjen, Power Kripke-Platek set theory and the axiom of choice. Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol.30, No.1, 2018.
  4. Richard Platek, Eliminating the continuum hypothesis. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol.36, No.1, 1969.
  5. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".