Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
References

Algebraic logic and logically-geometric

Profile image of Eugene PlotkinEugene Plotkin

2013

Abstract

The main objective of this paper is to show that the notion of type which was developed within the frames of logic and model theory has deep ties with geometric properties of algebras. These ties go back and forth from universal algebraic geometry to the model theory through the machinery of algebraic logic. We show that types appear naturally as logical kernels in the Galois correspondence between filters in the Halmos algebra of first order formulas with equalities and elementary sets in the corresponding affine space.

Related papers

A Survey of Abstract Algebraic Logic
Ramon Jansana

Studia Logica - An International Journal for Symbolic Logic, 2003

View PDFchevron_right
Compatibility Operators in Abstract Algebraic Logic
Ramon Jansana

Journal of Symbolic Logic, 2016

This paper presents a unified framework that explains and extends the already successful applications of the Leibniz operator, the Suszko operator, and the Tarski operator in recent developments in abstract algebraic logic. To this end, we refine Czelakowski's notion of an S-compatibility operator, and introduce the notion of coherent family of S-compatibility operators, for a sentential logic S. The notion of coherence is a restricted property of commutativity with inverse images by surjective homomorphisms, which is satisfied by both the Leibniz and the Suszko operators. We generalize several constructions and results already existing for the mentioned operators; in particular, the well-known classes of algebras associated with a logic through each of them, and the notions of full generalized model of a logic and a special kind of S-filters (which generalizes the less-known notion of Leibniz filter). We obtain a General Correspondence Theorem, extending the well-known one from the theory of protoalgebraic logics to arbitrary logics and to more general operators, and strengthening its formulation. We apply the general results to the Leibniz and the Suszko operators, and obtain several characterizations of the main classes of logics in the Leibniz hierarchy by the form of their full generalized models, by old and new properties of the Leibniz operator, and by the behaviour of the Suszko operator. Some of these characterizations complete or extend known ones, for some classes in the hierarchy, thus offering an integrated approach to the Leibniz hierarchy that uncovers some new, nice symmetries.

View PDFchevron_right
Applying Algebraic Logic; a General Methodology
István Németi

2000

Connections between Algebraic Logic and (ordinary) Logic. Algebraic co- unterpart of model theoretic semantics, algebraic counterpart of proof theory, and their connections. The class Alg(L) of algebras associated to any logic L. Equivalence theorems stating that L has a certain logical property iff Alg(L) has a certain algebraic property. (E.g. L admits a strongly complete Hilbert- style inference system iff

View PDFchevron_right
Comparing hierarchies of types in models of linear logic
Melly Melly

Information and Computation/information and Control, 2004

We show that two models M and N of linear logic collapse to the same extensional hierarchy of types, when (1) their monoidal categories C and D are related by a pair of monoidal functors F : C D : G and transformations Id C ⇒ GF and Id D ⇒ FG, and (2) their exponentials ! M and ! N are related by distributive laws : ! N F ⇒ F ! M and Á : ! M G ⇒ G ! N commuting to the promotion rule. The key ingredient of the proof is a notion of back-and-forth translation between the hierarchies of types induced by M and N. We apply this result to compare (1) the qualitative and the quantitative hierarchies induced by the coherence (or hypercoherence) space model, (2) several paradigms of games semantics: error-free vs. error-aware, alternated vs. non-alternated, backtracking vs. repetitive, uniform vs. nonuniform. 203 The tensor product of two coherence spaces A = (|A|, A ) and B = (|B|, B ) is their product as graphs:

View PDFchevron_right
Assertional logics, truth-equational logics, and the hierarchies of abstract algebraic logic
Ramon Jansana

Outstanding contributions to logic, 2018

We establish some relations between the class of truth-equational logics, the class of assertional logics, other classes in the Leibniz hierarchy, and the classes in the Frege hierarchy. We argue that the class of assertional logics belongs properly in the Leibniz hierarchy. We give two new characterizations of truth-equational logics in terms of their full generalized models, and use them to obtain further results on the internal structure of the Frege hierarchy and on the relations between the two hierarchies. Some of these results and several counterexamples contribute to answer a few open problems in abstract algebraic logic, and open a new one.

View PDFchevron_right
Algebraizable logics and a functorial encoding of its morphisms
Luiz Mariano

Logic Journal of the IGPL, 2017

The present work presents some results about the categorial relation between logics and its categories of structures. A (propositional, finitary) logic is a pair given by a signature and Tarskian consequence relation on its formula algebra. The logics are the objects in our categories of logics; the morphisms are certain signature morphisms that are translations between logics ([AFLM1],[AFLM2],[AFLM3] [FC]). Morphisms between algebraizable logics ([BP]) are translations that preserves algebraizing pairs ([MaMe]): they can be completely encoded by certain functors defined on the quasi-variety canonically associated to the algebraizable logics. This kind of results will be useful in the development of a categorial approach to the representation theory of general logics ([MaPi1], [MaPi2], [AJMP]).

View PDFchevron_right
A note of the full generalized models of the extensions of a logic
Ramon Jansana

Reports on Mathematical Logic

In this short note we show that the full generalized models of any extension of a logic can be determined from the full generalized models of the base logic in a simple way. The result is a consequence of two central theorems of the theory of full generalized models of sentential logics. As applications we investigate when the full generalized models of an extension can also be full generalized models of the base logic, and we prove that each Suszko filter of a logic determines a Suszko filter of each of its extensions, also in a simple way. We use the terminology and notations that are standard in abstract algebraic logic, as given for instance in [7]. We identify a sentential logic S with a structural (i.e., substitution invariant) consequence relation S on the set of formulas of some algebraic

View PDFchevron_right
Grigore C. Moisil (1906 - 1973) and his School in Algebraic Logic
Afrodita Iorgulescu

International Journal of Computers Communications & Control, 2006

We present in the paper a very concise but updated survey emphasizing the research done by Gr. C. Moisil and his school in algebraic logic.

View PDFchevron_right
An Algebraic Approach to Mathematical Logic
Takahiro Kato

This book presents an algebraic treatment of propositional and first-order logic. The presentation is unconventional. We start from a Boolean congruence on a pre-Boolean algebra as an algebraic model of propositional logic, define a propositional theory by the hull of a Boolean congruence, and then derive deductive systems from the properties of a propositional theory. For this approach, we provide a new characterization of a Boolean algebra that closely parallels our definition of propositional theories. The algebraic method adopted for propositional logic is then extended to first-order logic. Again, we start from a first-order Boolean congruence, define a first-order theory by the hull of a first-order Boolean congruence, and then derive deductive systems from the properties of a first-order theory. To reconcile the algebra and semantics of first-order logic, an isomorphism is established between the Lindenbaum algebra of a firstorder theory and a field of sets of that theory. The completeness theorem and the compactness theorem are then derived from this representation theorem.

View PDFchevron_right
Type theories, normal forms, and D?-lambda-models*1
mario coppo

Information and Computation/information and Control, 1987

View PDFchevron_right

References (42)

  1. M. Amer, T.S. Ahmed, Polyadic and cylindric algebras of sentences, (En- glish summary) MLQ Math. Log. Q. 52, (2006), no. 5, p. 444-449.
  2. H. Andreka, I. Nemeti, I. Sain, Algebraic logic. Handbook of philosophical logic, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 2, (2001), p. 133-247.
  3. G.Baumslag, A. Myasnikov, V. Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over groups I, J. of Algebra, 219:1, (1999), 16-79.
  4. C.C. Chang, H.J. Keisler, Model Theory, North-Holland Publ. Co., (1973).
  5. E. Daniyarova, I. Kazachkov, V. Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over a free metabelian Lie algebra. I. U -algebras and universal classes. (Russian) Fundam. Prikl. Mat. 9, (2003), no. 3, p. 37-63; translation in J. Math. Sci. (N. Y.) 135 (2006), no. 5.
  6. E. Daniyarova, I. Kazachkov, V. Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over a free metabelian Lie algebra. II. The finite field case. (Russian) Fundam. Prikl. Mat. 9, (2003), no. 3, p. 65-87; translation in J. Math. Sci. (N. Y.) 135, (2006), no. 5.
  7. E. Daniyarova, A. Myasnikov, V. Remeslennikov, Unification theorems in algebraic geometry. Aspects of infinite groups, Algebra Discrete Math., 1, World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ, (2008), 80-111.
  8. E.Daniyarova, A.Miasnikov, V.Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over algebraic structures II: Foundations, J. Algebra, submitted, arXiv:01002.3562v1 [math.AG]
  9. E.Daniyarova, A.Miasnikov, V.Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over al- gebraic structures III: Equationally Noetherian property and compactness, arXiv: 1002.4243v1 [math.AG]
  10. P.R. Halmos, Algebraic logic, New York, (1969). Papers [11]-[14] are reprinted in [10].
  11. P.R. Halmos, Algebraic logic. I. Monadic Boolean algebras. Compositio Math. 12, (1956), p. 217-249.
  12. P.R. Halmos, Algebraic logic. II. Homogeneous locally finite polyadic Boolean algebras of infinite degree. Fund. Math. 43, (1956), p. 255-325.
  13. P.R. Halmos, Algebraic logic. III. Predicates, terms, and operations in polyadic algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 83, (1956), p, 430-470.
  14. P.R. Halmos, Algebraic logic. IV. Equality in polyadic algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 86, (1957), 1-27.
  15. L. Henkin, J.D. Monk, A. Tarski, Cylindric Algebras, North-Holland Publ. Co. (1971, 1985).
  16. P.J. Higgins, Algebras with a scheme of operators, Math. Nachr. 27, (1963), p. 115-132.
  17. W. Hodges, Model theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applica- tions 42, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1993).
  18. J.M. Font, R. Jansana, D. Pigozzi, A survey of abstract algebraic logic. Ab- stract algebraic logic, Part II (Barcelona, 1997). Studia Logica 74, (2003), no. 1-2, p. 13-97.
  19. J.M. Font, R. Jansana, D. Pigozzi, Update to "A survey of abstract algebraic logic", Studia Logica 91, (2009), no. 1, p. 125-130,
  20. O. Kharlampovich, A. Myasnikov, Irreducible affine varieties over free groups I: Irreducibility of quadratic equations and Nullstellensatz, J. of Al- gebra, 200:2, (1998), 472-516.
  21. O. Kharlampovich, A. Myasnikov, Irreducible affine varieties over free groups II: Systems in triangular quasi-quadratic form and description of residually free groups, J. of Algebra, 200:2, (1998), 517-570.
  22. A. Kvaschuk, A. Myasnikov, V. Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over groups. III. Elements of model theory. J. Algebra, 288:1, (2005), p. 78-98.
  23. A.G. Kurosh, Lectures in general algebra. International Series of Mono- graphs in Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 70 Pergamon Press, Oxford- Edinburgh-New York, 1965.
  24. L. LeBlanc, Nonhomogeneous polyadic algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 13, (1962), p. 59-65.
  25. S. Mac Lane, Categories for the Working Mathematician, Springer-Verlag, (1971).
  26. A.I. Malcev Algebraic Systems, Springer-Verlag, (1973).
  27. Yu.I. Manin, A course in mathematical logic for mathematicians. Second edition. Chapters I-VIII translated from the Russian by Neal Koblitz. With new chapters by Boris Zilber and the author. Graduate Texts in Mathe- matics, 53. Springer, New York, 2010. xviii+384 pp.
  28. D. Marker, Model Theory: An Introduction, Springer Verlag, 2002, 360pp.
  29. A. Myasnikov, V. Remeslennikov, Algebraic geometry over groups II, Log- ical foundations, J. of Algebra, 234:1, (2000), 225-276.
  30. C. Perrin, R. Sklinos, Homogenety in the free group, arXiv: 1003.4095v1 [math GM], (2010).
  31. B. Plotkin, Algebraic geometry in First Order Logic, Sovremennaja Matem- atika and Applications 22 (2004), p. 16-62. Journal of Math. Sciences, 137, n.5, (2006), p. 5049-5097. http:// arxiv.org/ abs/ math GM/0312485.
  32. B. Plotkin, Isotyped algebras. Arxiv: math.LO/0812.3298v2 (2009). Sub- mitted.
  33. B. Plotkin, Seven lectures on the universal algebraic geometry, Preprint,(2002), Arxiv:math, GM/0204245, 87pp.
  34. B. Plotkin, Some results and problems related to universal algebraic geom- etry, International Journal of Algebra and Computation, 17(5/6), (2007), p. 1133-1164.
  35. B. Plotkin, Universal algebra, algebraic logic and databases. Kluwer Acad. Publ., 1994.
  36. B. Plotkin, G. Zhitomirski, Automorphisms of categories of free algebras of some varieties, J. Algebra, 306, (2006), no. 2, p. 344-367.
  37. B. Plotkin, G. Zhitomirski, On automorphisms of categories of universal algebras, Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 17, (2007), no. 5-6, p. 1115-1132.
  38. B. Plotkin, G. Zhitomirski, Some logical invariants of algebras and logical relations between algebras, Algebra and Analysis, 19:5, (2007), p. 214-245, St. Peterburg Math. J., 19:5, (2008), p. 859-879.
  39. B. Poizat, A course in model theory. An introduction to contemporary math- ematical logic. Translated from the French by Moses Klein and revised by the author. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, (2000), xxxii+443 pp.
  40. E. Rips, Z. Sela, Cyclyc splittings of the finitely presented groups and the canonical JSJ decomposition, Ann. of Math., 146:1 , (1997), p. 53-109.
  41. Z. Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups I, IHES, 93, (2001), p. 31-105.
  42. I.R. Shafarevich, Basic algebraic geometry, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, (1974).

Related papers

Algebraic Logic and Logically-Geometric Types in Varieties of Algebras
Eugene Plotkin

Journal of Algebra and Its Applications, 2013

The main objective of this paper is to show that the notion of type which was developed within the frames of logic and model theory has deep ties with geometric properties of algebras. These ties go back and forth from universal algebraic geometry to the model theory through the machinery of algebraic logic. We show that types appear naturally as logical kernels in the Galois correspondence between filters in the Halmos algebra of first order formulas with equalities and elementary sets in the corresponding affine space.

View PDFchevron_right
Some logical invariants of algebras and logical relations between algebras
Eugene Plotkin

St. Petersburg Mathematical Journal, 2008

Let Θ be an arbitrary variety of algebras and H an algebra in Θ. Along with algebraic geometry in Θ over the distinguished algebra H, a logical geometry in Θ over H is considered. This insight leads to a system of notions and stimulates a number of new problems. Some logical invariants of algebras H ∈ Θ are introduced and logical relations between different H 1 and H 2 in Θ are analyzed. The paper contains a brief review of ideas of logical geometry (§1), the necessary material from algebraic logic (§2), and a deeper introduction to the subject (§3). Also, a list of problems is given. 0.1. Introduction. The paper consists of three sections. A reader wishing to get a feeling of the subject and to understand the logic of the main ideas can confine himself to §1. A more advanced look at the topic of the paper is presented in § §2 and 3. In §1 we give a list of the main notions, formulate some results, and specify problems. Not all the notions used in §1 are well formalized and commonly known. In particular, we operate with algebraic logic, referring to §2 for precise definitions. However, §1 is self-contained from the viewpoint of ideas of universal algebraic geometry and logical geometry. Old and new notions from algebraic logic are collected in §2. Here we define the Halmos categories and multisorted Halmos algebras related to a variety Θ of algebras. §3 is a continuation of §1. Here we give necessary proofs and discuss problems. The main problem we are interested in is what are the algebras with the same geometrical logic. The theory described in the paper has deep ties with model theory, and some problems are of a model-theoretic nature. We emphasize once again that §1 gives a complete insight on the subject, while §2 and §3 describe and decode the material of §1. §1. Preliminaries. General view 1.1. Main idea. We fix an arbitrary variety Θ of algebras. Throughout the paper we consider algebras H in Θ. To each algebra H ∈ Θ one can attach an algebraic geometry (AG) in Θ over H and a logical geometry (LG) in Θ over H. In algebraic geometry we consider algebraic sets over H, while in logical geometry we consider logical (elementary) sets over H. These latter sets are related to the elementary logic, i.e., to the first order logic (FOL). Consideration of these sets gives grounds to geometries in an arbitrary variety of algebras. We distinguish algebraic and logical geometries in Θ. However, there is very 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 03G25.

View PDFchevron_right
On universal algebraic constructions of logics
Hajnal Andréka

Studia Logica, 1977

View PDFchevron_right
Algebraic Logic, Where Does it Stand Today?
Tarek Sayed-Ahmed

Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 2005

This is a survey article on algebraic logic. It gives a historical background leading up to a modern perspective. Central problems in algebraic logic (like the representation problem) are discussed in connection to other branches of logic, like modal logic, proof theory, model-theoretic forcing, finite combinatorics, and Gödel's incompleteness results. We focus on cylindric algebras. Relation algebras and polyadic algebras are mostly covered only insofar as they relate to cylindric algebras, and even there we have not told the whole story. We relate the algebraic notion of neat embeddings (a notion special to cylindric algebras) to the metalogical ones of provability, interpolation and omitting types in variants of first logic. Another novelty that occurs here is relating the algebraic notion of atom-canonicity for a class of boolean algebras with operators to the metalogical one of omitting types for the corresponding logic. A hitherto unpublished application of algebraic logic...

View PDFchevron_right
Chapter 1: Generalities on Abstract Logics and Sentential Logics
Ramon Jansana

2009

In this chapter we include the main definitions, notations, and general properties concerning logical matrices, abstract logics and sentential logics. Most of the results reproduced here are not new; however, those concerning abstract logics are not well-known, so it seems useful to recall them in some detail, and to prove some of the ones that are new. Useful references on these topics are Brown and Suszko [1973], Burris and Sankappanavar [1981] and Wójcicki [1988]. Algebras In this monograph (except in Chapter 5, where we deal with examples) we will always work with algebras A = A,. .. of the same, arbitrary, similarity type; thus, when we say "every/any/some algebra" we mean "of the same type". By Hom(A, B) we denote the set of all homomorphisms from the algebra A into the algebra B. The set of congruences of the algebra A will be denoted by ConA. Many of the sets we will consider have the structure of a (often complete, or even algebraic) lattice, but we will not use a different symbol for the lattice and for the underlying set, since no confusion is likely to arise. Given any class K of algebras, the set Con K A = {θ ∈ ConA : A/θ ∈ K} is called the set of K-congruences of A; while this set is ordered under ⊆, in general it is not a lattice. This set will play an important role in this monograph.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Contents
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved