Ordinal analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:More footnotes

Template:Short description In proof theory, ordinal analysis assigns ordinals (often large countable ordinals) to mathematical theories as a measure of their strength. If theories have the same proof-theoretic ordinal they are often equiconsistent, and if one theory has a larger proof-theoretic ordinal than another it can often prove the consistency of the second theory.

In addition to obtaining the proof-theoretic ordinal of a theory, in practice ordinal analysis usually also yields various other pieces of information about the theory being analyzed, for example characterizations of the classes of provably recursive, hyperarithmetical, or Δ21 functions of the theory.[1]

History

The field of ordinal analysis was formed when Gerhard Gentzen in 1934 used cut elimination to prove, in modern terms, that the proof-theoretic ordinal of Peano arithmetic is ε0. See Gentzen's consistency proof.

Definition

Ordinal analysis concerns true, effective (recursive) theories that can interpret a sufficient portion of arithmetic to make statements about ordinal notations.

The proof-theoretic ordinal of such a theory T is the supremum of the order types of all ordinal notations (necessarily recursive, see next section) that the theory can prove are well founded—the supremum of all ordinals α for which there exists a notation o in Kleene's sense such that T proves that o is an ordinal notation. Equivalently, it is the supremum of all ordinals α such that there exists a recursive relation R on ω (the set of natural numbers) that well-orders it with ordinal α and such that T proves transfinite induction of arithmetical statements for R.

Ordinal notations

Some theories, such as subsystems of second-order arithmetic, have no conceptualization or way to make arguments about transfinite ordinals. For example, to formalize what it means for a subsystem T of Z2 to "prove α well-ordered", we instead construct an ordinal notation (A,<~) with order type α. T can now work with various transfinite induction principles along (A,<~), which substitute for reasoning about set-theoretic ordinals.

However, some pathological notation systems exist that are unexpectedly difficult to work with. For example, Rathjen gives a primitive recursive notation system (,<T) that is well-founded iff PA is consistent,[2]p. 3 despite having order type ω - including such a notation in the ordinal analysis of PA would result in the false equality PTO(PA)=ω.

Upper bound

Since an ordinal notation must be recursive, the proof-theoretic ordinal of any theory is less than or equal to the Church–Kleene ordinal ω1CK. In particular, the proof-theoretic ordinal of an inconsistent theory is equal to ω1CK, because an inconsistent theory trivially proves that all ordinal notations are well-founded.

For any theory that's both Σ11-axiomatizable and Π11-sound, the existence of a recursive ordering that the theory fails to prove is well-ordered follows from the Σ11 bounding theorem, and said provably well-founded ordinal notations are in fact well-founded by Π11-soundness. Thus the proof-theoretic ordinal of a Π11-sound theory that has a Σ11 axiomatization will always be a (countable) recursive ordinal, that is, strictly less than ω1CK. [2]Theorem 2.21

Examples

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω

  • Q, Robinson arithmetic (although the definition of the proof-theoretic ordinal for such weak theories has to be tweaked)Script error: No such module "Unsubst"..
  • PA, the first-order theory of the nonnegative part of a discretely ordered ring.

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω2

  • RFA, rudimentary function arithmetic.[3]
  • 0, arithmetic with induction on Δ0-predicates without any axiom asserting that exponentiation is total.

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω3

  • EFA, elementary function arithmetic.
  • 0 + exp, arithmetic with induction on Δ0-predicates augmented by an axiom asserting that exponentiation is total.
  • RCAScript error: No such module "Su"., a second order form of EFA sometimes used in reverse mathematics.
  • WKLScript error: No such module "Su"., a second order form of EFA sometimes used in reverse mathematics.

Friedman's grand conjecture suggests that much "ordinary" mathematics can be proved in weak systems having this as their proof-theoretic ordinal.

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ωn (for n = 2, 3, ... ω)

  • 0 or EFA augmented by an axiom ensuring that each element of the n-th level n of the Grzegorczyk hierarchy is total.

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ωω

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ε0

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal the Feferman–Schütte ordinal Γ0

This ordinal is sometimes considered to be the upper limit for "predicative" theories.

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal the Bachmann–Howard ordinal

The Kripke-Platek or CZF set theories are weak set theories without axioms for the full powerset given as set of all subsets. Instead, they tend to either have axioms of restricted separation and formation of new sets, or they grant existence of certain function spaces (exponentiation) instead of carving them out from bigger relations.

Theories with larger proof-theoretic ordinals

<templatestyles src="Unsolved/styles.css" />

Unsolved problem in mathematics
What is the proof-theoretic ordinal of full second-order arithmetic?[4]
  • Π11-CA0, Π11 comprehension has a rather large proof-theoretic ordinal, which was described by Takeuti in terms of "ordinal diagrams",[5]p. 13 and which is bounded by ψ0ω) in Buchholz's notation. It is also the ordinal of ID<ω, the theory of finitely iterated inductive definitions. And also the ordinal of MLW, Martin-Löf type theory with indexed W-Types Script error: No such module "Footnotes"..
  • IDω, the theory of ω-iterated inductive definitions. Its proof-theoretic ordinal is equal to the Takeuti-Feferman-Buchholz ordinal.
  • T0, Feferman's constructive system of explicit mathematics has a larger proof-theoretic ordinal, which is also the proof-theoretic ordinal of the KPi, Kripke–Platek set theory with iterated admissibles and Σ21-AC+BI.
  • KPi, an extension of Kripke–Platek set theory based on a recursively inaccessible ordinal, has a very large proof-theoretic ordinal ψ(εI+1) described in a 1983 paper of Jäger and Pohlers, where I is the smallest inaccessible.[6] This ordinal is also the proof-theoretic ordinal of Δ21-CA+BI.
  • KPM, an extension of Kripke–Platek set theory based on a recursively Mahlo ordinal, has a very large proof-theoretic ordinal θ, which was described by Script error: No such module "Footnotes"..
  • TTM, an extension of Martin-Löf type theory by one Mahlo-universe, has an even larger proof-theoretic ordinal ψΩ1(ΩM+ω).
  • KP+Π3Ref has a proof-theoretic ordinal equal to Ψ(εK+1), where K refers to the first weakly compact, due to (Rathjen 1993)
  • KP+ΠωRef has a proof-theoretic ordinal equal to ΨXεΞ+1, where Ξ refers to the first Π02-indescribable and 𝕏=(ω+;P0;ϵ,ϵ,0), due to (Stegert 2010).
  • Stability has a proof-theoretic ordinal equal to Ψ𝕏εΥ+1 where Υ is a cardinal analogue of the least ordinal α which is α+β-stable for all β<α and 𝕏=(ω+;P0;ϵ,ϵ,0), due to (Stegert 2010).

Most theories capable of describing the power set of the natural numbers have proof-theoretic ordinals that are so large that no explicit combinatorial description has yet been given. This includes Π21CA0, full second-order arithmetic (Π1CA0) and set theories with powersets including ZF and ZFC. The strength of intuitionistic ZF (IZF) equals that of ZF.

Table of ordinal analyses

Table of proof-theoretic ordinals
Ordinal First-order arithmetic Second-order arithmetic Kripke-Platek set theory Type theory Constructive set theory Explicit mathematics
ω Q, PA
ω2 RFA, IΔ0
ω3 EFA, IΔ0+ RCA0*, WKL0*
ωn[1] EFAn, IΔ0n+
ωω PRA, IΣ1[7]p. 13 RCA0[7]p. 13, WKL0[7]p. 13 CPRC
ωωωω IΣ3[8][7]p. 13 RCA0+(Π20)IND[9]Template:Rp
ε0 PA[7]p. 13 ACA0[7]p. 13, Σ11AC0[7]p. 13, R-𝐄Ω^[10]p. 8, RCA[11]p. 148, WKL[11]p. 148, Δ11CA0[12] KPur[13]p. 869 EM0
εω ACA0+iRT,[14] RCA0+YnX(TJ(n,X,Y))[15]Template:Rp
εε0 ACA[16]p. 959
ζ0 ACA0+XY(TJ(ω,X,Y)),[17][15] p1(ACA0),[18]Template:Rp RFN0[17]p. 17, ACA0+(BR)[17]p. 5
φ(2,ε0) RFN, ACA+XY(TJ(ω,X,Y))[17]p. 52
φ(ω,0) ID1# Δ11CR, Σ11DC0[19] EM0+JR
φ(ε0,0) ID^1, KFL[20]p. 17, KF[20]p. 17 Δ11CA[21]p. 140, Σ11AC[21]p. 140, Σ11DC[21]p. 140, W-𝐄Ω^[10]p. 8 KPur+(INDN)[13]p. 870 ML1 EM0+J
φ(εε0,0) 𝐄Ω^[10]p. 27, 𝐄𝐈𝐃^1[10]p. 27
φ(φ(ω,0),0) PRSω[22]p.9
φ(<Ω,0)[2] Aut(ID#)
Γ0 ID^<ω,[23] U(PA), 𝐊𝐅𝐋*[20]p. 22, 𝐊𝐅*[20]p. 22, 𝒰(NFA)[24] ATR0, Δ11CA+BR, Δ11CA0+(SUB),[25] FP0[26]p. 26 KPi0[13]p. 878, KPu0+(BR)[13]p. 878 ML<ω, MLU
Γωω KPI0+(Σ1Iω)[27]p.13
Γε0 ID^ω ATR[28] KPI0+FIω
φ(1,ω,0) ID^<ωω ATR0+(Σ11DC)[18]Template:Rp KPi0+Σ1Iω
φ(1,ε0,0) ID^<ε0 ATR+(Σ11DC)[18]Template:Rp KPi0+FIω
φ(1,Γ0,0) ID^<Γ0 MLS
φ(2,0,0) Aut(ID^), FTR0[29] AxΣ11ACTR0[30]p.1167, AxATR+Σ11DCRFN0[30]p.1167 KPh0 Aut(ML)
φ(2,0,ε0) FTR[29] AxΣ11ACTR[30]p.1167, AxATR+Σ11DCRFN[30]p.1167
φ(2,ε0,0) KPh0+(FIω)[29]Template:Rp
φ(ω,0,0) (Π21RFN)0Σ11DC[31]p.233, Σ11TDC0[31]p.233 KPm0[32]p.276 EMA[32]p.276
φ(ε0,0,0) (Π21RFN)Σ11DC[31]p.233, Σ11TDC[18] KPm0+(*IN)[32]p.277 EMA+(𝕃IN)[32]p.277
φ(1,0,0,0) p1(Σ11TDC0)[18]Template:Rp
ψΩ1(ΩΩω) RCA0*+Π11CA,[33] p3(ACA0)[18]Template:Rp
ϑ(ΩΩ) p1(p3(ACA0))[18]Template:Rp
ψ0(εΩ+1)[3] ID1 W-𝐄Ω~[10]p. 8 KP,[2] KPω, KPu[13]p. 869 ML1V CZF EON
ψ(εΩ+ε0) 𝐄Ω~[10]p. 31, 𝐄𝐈𝐃~1[10]p. 31, 𝐀𝐂𝐀+(Π11-CA)[10]p. 31
ψ(εΩ+Ω) (ID12)0+BR[34]
ψ(εεΩ+1) 𝐄Ω[10]p. 33, 𝐄𝐈𝐃1[10]p. 33, 𝐀𝐂𝐀+(Π11-CA)+(BIPR)[10]p. 33
ψ0(ΓΩ+1)[4] U(ID1), ID^<ω[26]p. 26, Σ11DC0+(SUB)[26]p. 26, ATR0[26]p. 26, Σ11AC0+(SUB)[26]p. 26, 𝒰(ID1)[26]p. 26 FP0[26]p. 26, ATR0[26]p. 26
ψ0(φ(<Ω,0,Ω+1)) Aut(U(ID))
ψ0(Ωω) ID<ω[4]p. 28 Π11CA0[4]p. 28, Δ21CA0 MLW SUS+(SIN)[35]p. 27
ψ0(Ωωωω) Π11CA0+Π21IND[36]
ψ0(Ωωε0) WIDω Π11CA[37]p. 14 WKPI
ψ0(ΩωΩ) Π11CA+BR[38]
ψ0(Ωωω) Π11CA0+Π21BI[36]
ψ0(Ωωωω) Π11CA0+Π21BI+Π31IND[36]
ψ0(εΩω+1)[5] IDω Π11CA+BI KPI
ψ0(Ωωω) ID<ωω Δ21CR[4]p. 28 SUS+(NIN)[35]p. 27
ψ0(Ωε0) ID<ε0 Δ21CA[4]p. 28, Σ21AC WKPi SUS+(LIN)[35]p. 27
ψ0(ΩΩ) Aut(ID)[6]
ψΩ1(εΩΩ+1) ID*, BID2*, ID2*+BI[39] KPl*, KPlΩr
ψ0(Φ1(0)) Π11TR0, Π11TR0+Δ21CA0, Δ21CA+BI(implΣ21),Δ21CA+BR(implΣ21),𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃0pos, 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃0mon[39]Template:Rp KPiw+FOUNDR(impl)Σ),[39]Template:Rp KPiw+FOUND(impl)Σ),[39]Template:Rp

𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐊𝐏𝐥r, 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐊𝐏𝐥r+𝐊𝐏𝐢r[39]Template:Rp

ψ0(Φ1(0)ε0) Π11TR, 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃pos, 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃mon[39]Template:Rp 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐊𝐏𝐥w[39]Template:Rp
ψ0(εΦ1(0)+1) Π11TR+(BI), 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃2pos, 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐃2mon[39]Template:Rp 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐊𝐏𝐥[39]Template:Rp
ψ0(Φ1(ε0)) Π11TR+Δ21CA, Π11TR+Σ21AC[39]Template:Rp 𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐊𝐏𝐥w+𝐊𝐏𝐢w[39]Template:Rp
ψ0(Φω(0)) Δ21TR0, Σ21TRDC0, Δ21CA0+(Σ21BI)[39]Template:Rp 𝐊𝐏𝐢r+(ΣFOUND), 𝐊𝐏𝐢r+(ΣREC)[39]Template:Rp
ψ0(Φε0(0)) Δ21TR, Σ21TRDC, Δ21CA+(Σ21BI)[39]Template:Rp 𝐊𝐏𝐢w+(ΣFOUND), 𝐊𝐏𝐢w+(ΣREC)[39]Template:Rp
ψ(εI+1)[7] Δ21CA+BI[4]p. 28, Σ21AC+BI KPi CZF+REA T0
ψ(ΩI+ω) ML1W[40]Template:Rp
ψ(ΩL)[8] KPh ML<ωW
ψ(ΩL*)[9] Aut(MLW)
ψΩ(χεM+1(0))[10] Δ21CA+BI+(M)[41] KPM CZFM
ψ(ΩM+ω)[11] KPM+[42] TTM[42]
ΨΩ0(εK+1)[12] KP+Π3Ref[43]
Ψ(ω+;P0,ϵ,ϵ,0)εΞ+1[13] KP+ΠωRef[44]
Ψ(ω+;P0,ϵ,ϵ,0)εΥ+1[14] Stability[44]
ψω1CK(ε𝕊++1)[45] KPω+Π11Ref,[45] KPω+(MΣ1V)[46]
ψω1CK(ε𝕀+1)[45] Σ31DC+BI, Σ31AC+BI KPω+Π1Collection+(V=L)
ψω1CK(ε𝕀N+1)[47] ΣN+21DC+BI, ΣN+21AC+BI KPω+ΠNCollection+(V=L)
? PA+N<ωTI[Π01,ψω1CK(ε𝕀N+1)][47] 𝐙2, Π1CA KP+ΠωsetSeparation λ2[48]

Key

This is a list of symbols used in this table:

  • ψ represents various ordinal collapsing functions as defined in their respective citations.
  • Ψ represents either Rathjen's or Stegert's Psi.
  • φ represents Veblen's function.
  • ω represents the first transfinite ordinal.
  • εα represents the epsilon numbers.
  • Γα represents the gamma numbers (Γ0 is the Feferman–Schütte ordinal)
  • Ωα represent the uncountable ordinals (Ω1, abbreviated Ω, is ω1). Countability is considered necessary for an ordinal to be regarded as proof theoretic.
  • 𝕊 is an ordinal term denoting a stable ordinal, and 𝕊+ the least admissible ordinal above 𝕊.
  • 𝕀N is an ordinal term denoting an ordinal such that L𝕀NKPω+ΠNCollection+(V=L); N is a variable that defines a series of ordinal analyses of the results of ΠNCollection forall 1N<ω. when N=1, ψω1CK(ε𝕀1+1)=ψω1CK(ε𝕀+1)

This is a list of the abbreviations used in this table:

  • First-order arithmetic
    • Q is Robinson arithmetic
    • PA is the first-order theory of the nonnegative part of a discretely ordered ring.
    • RFA is rudimentary function arithmetic.
    • IΔ0 is arithmetic with induction restricted to Δ0-predicates without any axiom asserting that exponentiation is total.
    • EFA is elementary function arithmetic.
    • IΔ0+ is arithmetic with induction restricted to Δ0-predicates augmented by an axiom asserting that exponentiation is total.
    • EFAn is elementary function arithmetic augmented by an axiom ensuring that each element of the n-th level n of the Grzegorczyk hierarchy is total.
    • IΔ0n+ is IΔ0+ augmented by an axiom ensuring that each element of the n-th level n of the Grzegorczyk hierarchy is total.
    • PRA is primitive recursive arithmetic.
    • IΣ1 is arithmetic with induction restricted to Σ1-predicates.
    • PA is Peano arithmetic.
    • IDν# is ID^ν but with induction only for positive formulas.
    • ID^ν extends PA by ν iterated fixed points of monotone operators.
    • U(PA) is not exactly a first-order arithmetic system, but captures what one can get by predicative reasoning based on the natural numbers.
    • Aut(ID^) is autonomously iterated ID^ν (in other words, once an ordinal is defined, it can be used to index a new series of definitions.)
    • IDν extends PA by ν iterated least fixed points of monotone operators.
    • U(IDν) is not exactly a first-order arithmetic system, but captures what one can get by predicative reasoning based on ν-times iterated generalized inductive definitions.
    • Aut(U(ID)) is autonomously iterated U(IDν).
    • WIDν is a weakened version of IDν based on W-types.
    • TI[Π01,α] is a transfinite induction of length α no more than Π01-formulas. It happens to be the representation of the ordinal notation when used in first-order arithmetic.
  • Second-order arithmetic

In general, a subscript 0 means that the induction scheme is restricted to a single set induction axiom.

  • Kripke-Platek set theory
    • KP is Kripke-Platek set theory with the axiom of infinity.
    • KPω is Kripke-Platek set theory, whose universe is an admissible set containing ω.
    • WKPI is a weakened version of KPI based on W-types.
    • KPI asserts that the universe is a limit of admissible sets.
    • WKPi is a weakened version of KPi based on W-types.
    • KPi asserts that the universe is inaccessible sets.
    • KPh asserts that the universe is hyperinaccessible: an inaccessible set and a limit of inaccessible sets.
    • KPM asserts that the universe is a Mahlo set.
    • KP+ΠnRef is KP augmented by a certain first-order reflection scheme.
    • Stability is KPi augmented by the axiom ακα(Lκ1Lκ+α).
    • KPM+ is KPI augmented by the assertion "at least one recursively Mahlo ordinal exists".
    • KPω+(MΣ1V) is KPω with an axiom stating that 'there exists a non-empty and transitive set M such that MΣ1V'.

A superscript zero indicates that -induction is removed (making the theory significantly weaker).

  • Type theory
    • CPRC is the Herbelin-Patey Calculus of Primitive Recursive Constructions.
    • MLn is type theory without W-types and with n universes.
    • ML<ω is type theory without W-types and with finitely many universes.
    • MLU is type theory with a next universe operator.
    • MLS is type theory without W-types and with a superuniverse.
    • Aut(ML) is an automorphism on type theory without W-types.
    • ML1V is type theory with one universe and Aczel's type of iterative sets.
    • MLW is type theory with indexed W-Types.
    • ML1W is type theory with W-types and one universe.
    • ML<ωW is type theory with W-types and finitely many universes.
    • Aut(MLW) is an automorphism on type theory with W-types.
    • TTM is type theory with a Mahlo universe.
    • λ2 is System F, also polymorphic lambda calculus or second-order lambda calculus.
  • Constructive set theory
    • CZF is Aczel's constructive set theory.
    • CZF+REA is CZF plus the regular extension axiom.
    • CZF+REA+FZ2 is CZF+REA plus the full-second order induction scheme.
    • CZFM is CZF with a Mahlo universe.
  • Explicit mathematics
    • EM0 is basic explicit mathematics plus elementary comprehension
    • EM0+JR is EM0 plus join rule
    • EM0+J is EM0 plus join axioms
    • EON is a weak variant of the Feferman's T0.
    • T0 is EM0+J+IG, where IG is inductive generation.
    • T is EM0+J+IG+FZ2, where FZ2 is the full second-order induction scheme.

See also

Notes

1.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ For 1<nω
2.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ The Veblen function φ with countably infinitely iterated least fixed points.Template:Clarification needed
3.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Can also be commonly written as ψ(εΩ+1) in Madore's ψ.
4.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Uses Madore's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
5.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Can also be commonly written as ψ(εΩω+1) in Madore's ψ.
6.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ K represents the first recursively weakly compact ordinal. Uses Arai's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
7.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Also the proof-theoretic ordinal of Aut(WID), as the amount of weakening given by the W-types is not enough.
8.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ I represents the first inaccessible cardinal. Uses Jäger's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
9.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ L represents the limit of the ω-inaccessible cardinals. Uses (presumably) Jäger's ψ.
10.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ L*represents the limit of the Ω-inaccessible cardinals. Uses (presumably) Jäger's ψ.
11.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ M represents the first Mahlo cardinal. Uses Rathjen's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
12.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ K represents the first weakly compact cardinal. Uses Rathjen's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
13.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Ξ represents the first Π02-indescribable cardinal. Uses Stegert's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
14.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ Y is the smallest α such that θ<Yκ<Y('κ is θ-indescribable') and θ<Yκ<Y('κ is θ-indescribable θ<κ'). Uses Stegert's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
15.<templatestyles src="Citation/styles.css"/>^ M represents the first Mahlo cardinal. Uses (presumably) Rathjen's ψ.

Citations

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. M. Rathjen, "Admissible Proof Theory and Beyond". In Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics vol. 134 (1995), pp.123--147.
  2. a b c Rathjen, The Realm of Ordinal Analysis. Accessed 2021 September 29.
  3. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1". defines the rudimentary sets and rudimentary functions, and proves them equivalent to the Δ0-predicates on the naturals. An ordinal analysis of the system can be found in Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  4. a b c d e f M. Rathjen, Proof Theory: From Arithmetic to Set Theory (p.28). Accessed 14 August 2022.
  5. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  6. D. Madore, A Zoo of Ordinals (2017, p.2). Accessed 12 August 2022.
  7. a b c d e f g J. Avigad, R. Sommer, "A Model-Theoretic Approach to Ordinal Analysis" (1997).
  8. M. Rathjen, W. Carnielli, "Hydrae and subsystems of arithmetic" (1991)
  9. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  10. a b c d e f g h i j k G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Second order theories with ordinals and elementary comprehension". Archive for Mathematical Logic vol. 34 (1995).
  11. a b H. M. Friedman, S. G. Simpson, R. L. Smith, "Countable algebra and set existence axioms". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 25, iss. 2 (1983).
  12. Follows from theorem IX.4.4 of S. G. Simpson, Subsystems of Second-Order Arithmetic (2009).
  13. a b c d e G. Jäger, "The Strength of Admissibility Without Foundation". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 49, no. 3 (1984).
  14. B. Afshari, M. Rathjen, "Ordinal Analysis and the Infinite Ramsey Theorem". In Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 7318 (2012)
  15. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  16. S. Feferman, "Theories of finite type related to mathematical practice". In Handbook of Mathematical Logic, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics vol. 90 (1977), ed. J. Barwise, pub. North Holland.
  17. a b c d M. Heissenbüttel, "Theories of ordinal strength φ20 and φ2ε0" (2001)
  18. a b c d e f g D. Probst, "A modular ordinal analysis of metapredicative subsystems of second-order arithmetic" (2017)
  19. A. Cantini, "On the relation between choice and comprehension principles in second order arithmetic", Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 51 (1986), pp. 360--373.
  20. a b c d Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  21. a b c S. G. Simpson, "Friedman's Research on Subsystems of Second Order Arithmetic". In Harvey Friedman's Research on the Foundations of Mathematics, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics vol. 117 (1985), ed. L. Harrington, M. Morley, A. Šcedrov, S. G. Simpson, pub. North-Holland.
  22. J. Avigad, "An ordinal analysis of admissible set theory using recursion on ordinal notations". Journal of Mathematical Logic vol. 2, no. 1, pp.91--112 (2002).
  23. S. Feferman, "Iterated inductive fixed-point theories: application fo Hancock's conjecture". In Patras Logic Symposion, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics vol. 109 (1982).
  24. S. Feferman, T. Strahm, "The unfolding of non-finitist arithmetic", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 104, no.1--3 (2000), pp.75--96.
  25. S. Feferman, G. Jäger, "Choice principles, the bar rule and autonomously iterated comprehension schemes in analysis", Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 48, no. (1983), pp.63--70.
  26. a b c d e f g h U. Buchholtz, G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Theories of proof-theoretic strength ψ(ΓΩ+1)". In Concepts of Proof in Mathematics, Philosophy, and Computer Science (2016), ed. D. Probst, P. Schuster. DOI 10.1515/9781501502620-007.
  27. T. Strahm, "Autonomous fixed point progressions and fixed point transfinite recursion" (2000). In Logic Colloquium '98, ed. S. R. Buss, P. Hájek, and P. Pudlák . DOI 10.1017/9781316756140.031
  28. G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Fixed point theories and dependent choice". Archive for Mathematical Logic vol. 39 (2000), pp.493--508.
  29. a b c T. Strahm, "Autonomous fixed point progressions and fixed point transfinite recursion" (2000)
  30. a b c d C. Rüede, "Transfinite dependent choice and ω-model reflection". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 67, no. 3 (2002).
  31. a b c C. Rüede, "The proof-theoretic analysis of Σ11 transfinite dependent choice". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 122 (2003).
  32. a b c d T. Strahm, "Wellordering Proofs for Metapredicative Mahlo". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 67, no. 1 (2002)
  33. F. Ranzi, T. Strahm, "A flexible type system for the small Veblen ordinal" (2019). Archive for Mathematical Logic 58: 711–751.
  34. K. Fujimoto, "Notes on some second-order systems of iterated inductive definitions and Π11-comprehensions and relevant subsystems of set theory". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 166 (2015), pp. 409--463.
  35. a b c G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "The proof-theoretic analysis of the Suslin operator in applicative theories". In Reflections on the Foundations of Mathematics: Essays in Honor of Solomon Feferman (2002).
  36. a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  37. W. Buchholz, S. Feferman, W. Pohlers, W. Sieg, Iterated Inductive Definitions and Subsystems of Analysis: Recent Proof-Theoretical Studies
  38. W. Buchholz, Proof Theory of Impredicative Subsystems of Analysis (Studies in Proof Theory, Monographs, Vol 2 (1988)
  39. a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o M. Rathjen, "Investigations of Subsystems of Second Order Arithmetic and Set Theory in Strength between Π11CA and Δ21CA+BI: Part I". Archived 7 December 2023.
  40. M. Rathjen, "The Strength of Some Martin-Löf Type Theories"
  41. See conservativity result in Script error: No such module "citation/CS1". giving same ordinal as KPM
  42. a b A. Setzer, "A Model for a type theory with Mahlo universe" (1996).
  43. M. Rathjen, "Proof Theory of Reflection". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 68, iss. 2 (1994), pp.181--224.
  44. a b Stegert, Jan-Carl, "Ordinal Proof Theory of Kripke-Platek Set Theory Augmented by Strong Reflection Principles" (2010).
  45. a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  46. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  47. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  48. Valentin Blot. "A direct computational interpretation of second-order arithmetic via update recursion" (2022).

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".

References

<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />

  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".