A structure ${\mathbb Y}$ of a relational language L is called almost chainable iff there are a finite set $F \subset Y$ and a linear order $\,<$ on the set $Y\setminus F$ such that for each partial automorphism $\varphi $ (i.e., local automorphism, in Fraïssé’s terminology) of the linear order $\langle Y\setminus F, <\rangle $ the mapping $\mathop {\mathrm {id}}\nolimits _F \cup \varphi $ is a partial automorphism of ${\mathbb Y}$. By theorems of Fraïssé and Pouzet, an infinite structure ${\mathbb Y}$ is almost chainable iff the profile of ${\mathbb Y}$ is bounded; namely, iff there is a positive integer m such that ${\mathbb Y}$ has $\leq m$ non-isomorphic substructures of size n, for each positive integer n. A complete first order L-theory ${\mathcal T}$ having infinite models is called almost chainable iff all models of ${\mathcal T}$ are almost chainable and it is shown that the last condition is equivalent to the existence of one countable almost chainable model of ${\mathcal T}$. In addition, it is proved that an almost chainable theory has either one or continuum many non-isomorphic countable models and, thus, the Vaught conjecture is confirmed for almost chainable theories.

A permutation group G on a set A is ${\kappa }$-homogeneous iff for all $X,Y\in \bigl [ {A} \bigr ]^ {\kappa } $ with $|A\setminus X|=|A\setminus Y|=|A|$ there is a $g\in G$ with $g[X]=Y$. G is ${\kappa }$-transitive iff for any injective function f with $\operatorname {dom}(f)\cup \operatorname {ran}(f)\in \bigl [ {A} \bigr ]^ {\le {\kappa }} $ and $|A\setminus \operatorname {dom}(f)|=|A\setminus \operatorname {ran}(f)|=|A|$ there is a $g\in G$ with $f\subset g$.

Giving a partial answer to a question of P. M. Neumann [6] we show that there is an ${\omega }$-homogeneous but not ${\omega }$-transitive permutation group on a cardinal ${\lambda }$ provided

1. (i) ${\lambda }<{\omega }_{\omega }$, or

2. (ii) $2^{\omega }<{\lambda }$, and ${\mu }^{\omega }={\mu }^+$ and $\Box _{\mu }$ hold for each ${\mu }\le {\lambda }$ with ${\omega }=\operatorname {cf}({\mu })<{{\mu }}$, or

3. (iii) our model was obtained by adding $(2^{\omega })^+$ many Cohen generic reals to some ground model.

For ${\kappa }>{\omega }$ we give a method to construct large ${\kappa }$-homogeneous, but not ${\kappa }$-transitive permutation groups. Using this method we show that there exist ${\kappa }^+$-homogeneous, but not ${\kappa }^+$-transitive permutation groups on ${\kappa }^{+n}$ for each infinite cardinal ${\kappa }$ and natural number $n\ge 1$ provided $V=L$.

We make comments on some problems Erdős and Hajnal posed in their famous problem list. Let X be a graph on $\omega _1$ with the property that every uncountable set A of vertices contains a finite set s such that each element of $A-s$ is joined to one of the elements of s. Does then X contain an uncountable clique? (Problem 69) We prove that both the statement and its negation are consistent. Do there exist circuitfree graphs $\{X_n:n<\omega \}$ on $\omega _1$ such that if $A\in [\omega _1]^{\aleph _1}$, then $\{n<\omega :X_n\cap [A]^2=\emptyset \}$ is finite? (Problem 61) We show that the answer is yes under CH, and no under Martin’s axiom. Does there exist $F:[\omega _1]^2\to 3$ with all three colors appearing in every uncountable set, and with no triangle of three colors. (Problem 68) We give a different proof of Todorcevic’ theorem that the existence of a $\kappa $-Suslin tree gives $F:[\kappa ]^2\to \kappa $ establishing $\kappa \not \to [\kappa ]^2_{\kappa }$ with no three-colored triangles. This statement in turn implies the existence of a $\kappa $-Aronszajn tree.

In light of a gap found by Krupiński, we give a new proof of associativity for the Morley (or “nonforking”) product of invariant measures in NIP theories.

The $\Omega $ numbers—the halting probabilities of universal prefix-free machines—are known to be exactly the Martin-Löf random left-c.e. reals. We show that one cannot uniformly produce, from a Martin-Löf random left-c.e. real $\alpha $, a universal prefix-free machine U whose halting probability is $\alpha $. We also answer a question of Barmpalias and Lewis-Pye by showing that given a left-c.e. real $\alpha $, one cannot uniformly produce a left-c.e. real $\beta $ such that $\alpha - \beta $ is neither left-c.e. nor right-c.e.

Motivated by recent results and questions of Raghavan and Shelah, we present ZFC theorems on the bounding and various almost disjointness numbers, as well as on reaping and dominating families on uncountable, regular cardinals. We show that if $\kappa =\lambda ^+$ for some $\lambda \geq \omega $ and $\mathfrak {b}(\kappa )=\kappa ^+$ then $\mathfrak {a}_e(\kappa )=\mathfrak {a}_p(\kappa )=\kappa ^+$. If, additionally, $2^{<\lambda }=\lambda $ then $\mathfrak {a}_g(\kappa )=\kappa ^+$ as well. Furthermore, we prove a variety of new bounds for $\mathfrak {d}(\kappa )$ in terms of $\mathfrak {r}(\kappa )$, including $\mathfrak {d}(\kappa )\leq \mathfrak {r}_\sigma (\kappa )\leq \operatorname {\mathrm {cf}}([\mathfrak {r}(\kappa )]^\omega )$, and $\mathfrak {d}(\kappa )\leq \mathfrak {r}(\kappa )$ whenever $\mathfrak {r}(\kappa )<\mathfrak {b}(\kappa )^{+\kappa }$ or $\operatorname {\mathrm {cf}}(\mathfrak {r}(\kappa ))\leq \kappa $ holds.

This paper presents hitherto unpublished writings of Kurt Gödel concerning logical, epistemological, theological, and physical antinomies, which he generally considered as “the most interesting facts in modern logic,” and which he used as a basis for his famous metamathematical results. After investigating different perspectives on the notion of the logical structure of the antinomies and presenting two “antinomies of the intensional,” a new kind of paradox closely related to Gödel’s ontological proof for the existence of God is introduced and completed by a compilation of further theological antinomies. Finally, after a presentation of unpublished general philosophical remarks concerning the antinomies, Gödel’s type-theoretic variant of Leibniz’ Monadology, discovered in his notes on the foundations of quantum mechanics, is examined. Most of the material presented here has been transcribed from the Gabelsberger shorthand system for the first time.

We ask, when is a property of a model a logical property? According to the so-called Tarski–Sher criterion this is the case when the property is preserved by isomorphisms. We relate this to model-theoretic characteristics of abstract logics in which the model class is definable. This results in a graded concept of logicality in the terminology of Sagi [46]. We investigate which characteristics of logics, such as variants of the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem, Completeness theorem, and absoluteness, are relevant from the logicality point of view, continuing earlier work by Bonnay, Feferman, and Sagi. We suggest that a logic is the more logical the closer it is to first order logic. We also offer a refinement of the result of McGee that logical properties of models can be expressed in $L_{\infty \infty }$ if the expression is allowed to depend on the cardinality of the model, based on replacing $L_{\infty \infty }$ by a “tamer” logic.

The symmetries between points and lines in planar projective geometry and between points and planes in solid projective geometry are striking features of these geometries that were extensively discussed during the nineteenth century under the labels “duality” or “reciprocity.” The aims of this article are, first, to provide a systematic analysis of duality from a modern point of view, and, second, based on this, to give a historical overview of how discussions about duality evolved during the nineteenth century. Specifically, we want to see in which ways geometers’ preoccupation with duality was shaped by developments that lead to modern logic towards the end of the nineteenth century, and how these developments in turn might have been influenced by reflections on duality.

We consider the complexity of special $\alpha $-limit sets, a kind of backward limit set for non-invertible dynamical systems. We show that these sets are always analytic, but not necessarily Borel, even in the case of a surjective map on the unit square. This answers a question posed by Kolyada, Misiurewicz, and Snoha.

We consider G, a linear algebraic group defined over $\Bbbk $, an algebraically closed field (ACF). By considering $\Bbbk $ as an embedded residue field of an algebraically closed valued field K, we can associate to it a compact G-space $S^\mu _G(\Bbbk )$ consisting of $\mu $-types on G. We show that for each $p_\mu \in S^\mu _G(\Bbbk )$, $\mathrm {Stab}^\mu (p)=\mathrm {Stab}\left (p_\mu \right )$ is a solvable infinite algebraic group when $p_\mu $ is centered at infinity and residually algebraic. Moreover, we give a description of the dimension of $\mathrm {Stab}\left (p_\mu \right )$ in terms of the dimension of p.

We prove completeness of preferential conditional logic with respect to convexity over finite sets of points in the Euclidean plane. A conditional is defined to be true in a finite set of points if all extreme points of the set interpreting the antecedent satisfy the consequent. Equivalently, a conditional is true if the antecedent is contained in the convex hull of the points that satisfy both the antecedent and consequent. Our result is then that every consistent formula without nested conditionals is satisfiable in a model based on a finite set of points in the plane. The proof relies on a result by Richter and Rogers showing that every finite abstract convex geometry can be represented by convex polygons in the plane.

This paper introduces three model-theoretic constructions for generalized Epstein semantics: reducts, ultramodels and $\textsf {S}$-sets. We apply these notions to obtain metatheoretical results. We prove connective inexpressibility by means of a reduct, compactness by an ultramodel and definability theorem which states that a set of generalized Epstein models is definable iff it is closed under ultramodels and $\textsf {S}$-sets. Furthermore, a corollary concerning definability of a set of models by a single formula is given on the basis of the main theorem and the compactness theorem. We also provide an example of a natural set of generalized Epstein models which is undefinable. Its undefinability is proven by means of an $\textsf {S}$-set.

There has been a recent interest in hierarchical generalizations of classic incompleteness results. This paper provides evidence that such generalizations are readily obtainable from suitably formulated hierarchical versions of the principles used in the original proofs. By collecting such principles, we prove hierarchical versions of Mostowski’s theorem on independent formulae, Kripke’s theorem on flexible formulae, Woodin’s theorem on the universal algorithm, and a few related results. As a corollary, we obtain the expected result that the formula expressing “$\mathrm {T}$ is $\Sigma _n$-ill” is a canonical example of a $\Sigma _{n+1}$ formula that is $\Pi _{n+1}$-conservative over $\mathrm {T}$.

A set of reals is universally Baire if all of its continuous preimages in topological spaces have the Baire property. ${\sf Sealing}$ is a type of generic absoluteness condition introduced by Woodin that asserts in strong terms that the theory of the universally Baire sets cannot be changed by set forcings. The ${\sf Largest\ Suslin\ Axiom}$ (${\sf LSA}$) is a determinacy axiom isolated by Woodin. It asserts that the largest Suslin cardinal is inaccessible for ordinal definable surjections. Let ${\sf LSA}$-${\sf over}$-${\sf uB}$ be the statement that in all (set) generic extensions there is a model of $\sf {LSA}$ whose Suslin, co-Suslin sets are the universally Baire sets. We outline the proof that over some mild large cardinal theory, $\sf {Sealing}$ is equiconsistent with $\sf {LSA}$-$\sf {over}$-$\sf {uB}$. In fact, we isolate an exact theory (in the hierarchy of strategy mice) that is equiconsistent with both (see Definition 3.1). As a consequence, we obtain that $\sf {Sealing}$ is weaker than the theory “$\sf {ZFC}$ + there is a Woodin cardinal which is a limit of Woodin cardinals.” This significantly improves upon the earlier consistency proof of $\sf {Sealing}$ by Woodin. A variation of $\sf {Sealing}$, called $\sf {Tower \ Sealing}$, is also shown to be equiconsistent with $\sf {Sealing}$ over the same large cardinal theory. We also outline the proof that if V has a proper class of Woodin cardinals, a strong cardinal, and a generically universally Baire iteration strategy, then $\sf {Sealing}$ holds after collapsing the successor of the least strong cardinal to be countable. This result is complementary to the aforementioned equiconsistency result, where it is shown that $\sf {Sealing}$ holds in a generic extension of a certain minimal universe. This theorem is more general in that no minimal assumption is needed. A corollary of this is that $\sf {LSA}$-$\sf {over}$-$\sf {uB}$ is not equivalent to $\sf {Sealing}$.

In Baghdad in the mid twelfth century Abū al-Barakāt proposes a radical new procedure for finding the conclusions of premise-pairs in syllogistic logic, and for identifying those premise-pairs that have no conclusions. The procedure makes no use of features of the standard Aristotelian apparatus, such as conversions or syllogistic figures. In place of these al-Barakāt writes out pages of diagrams consisting of labelled horizontal lines. He gives no instructions and no proof that the procedure will yield correct results. So the reader has to work out what his procedure is and whether it is correct. The procedure turns out to be insightful and entirely correct, but this paper may be the first study to give a full description of the procedure and a rigorous proof of its correctness.

Strong negation is a well-known alternative to the standard negation in intuitionistic logic. It is defined virtually by giving falsity conditions to each of the connectives. Among these, the falsity condition for implication appears to unnecessarily deviate from the standard negation. In this paper, we introduce a slight modification to strong negation, and observe its comparative advantages over the original notion. In addition, we consider the paraconsistent variants of our modification, and study their relationship with non-constructive principles and connexivity.

We present a new manifestation of Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem and discuss its foundational significance, in particular with respect to Hilbert’s program. Specifically, we consider a proper extension of Peano arithmetic ($\mathbf {PA}$) by a mathematically meaningful axiom scheme that consists of $\Sigma ^0_2$-sentences. These sentences assert that each computably enumerable ($\Sigma ^0_1$-definable without parameters) property of finite binary trees has a finite basis. Since this fact entails the existence of polynomial time algorithms, it is relevant for computer science. On a technical level, our axiom scheme is a variant of an independence result due to Harvey Friedman. At the same time, the meta-mathematical properties of our axiom scheme distinguish it from most known independence results: Due to its logical complexity, our axiom scheme does not add computational strength. The only known method to establish its independence relies on Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem. In contrast, Gödel’s theorem is not needed for typical examples of $\Pi ^0_2$-independence (such as the Paris–Harrington principle), since computational strength provides an extensional invariant on the level of $\Pi ^0_2$-sentences.

The paper provides a proof theoretic characterization of the Russellian theory of definite descriptions (RDD) as characterized by Kalish, Montague and Mar (KMM). To this effect three sequent calculi are introduced: LKID0, LKID1 and LKID2. LKID0 is an auxiliary system which is easily shown to be equivalent to KMM. The main research is devoted to LKID1 and LKID2. The former is simpler in the sense of having smaller number of rules and, after small change, satisfies cut elimination but fails to satisfy the subformula property. In LKID2 an additional analysis of different kinds of identities leads to proliferation of rules but yields the subformula property. This refined proof theoretic analysis leading to fully analytic calculus with constructive proof of cut elimination is the main contribution of the paper.

Inferentialism is a theory in the philosophy of language which claims that the meanings of expressions are constituted by inferential roles or relations. Instead of a traditional model-theoretic semantics, it naturally lends itself to a proof-theoretic semantics, where meaning is understood in terms of inference rules with a proof system. Most work in proof-theoretic semantics has focused on logical constants, with comparatively little work on the semantics of non-logical vocabulary. Drawing on Robert Brandom’s notion of material inference and Greg Restall’s bilateralist interpretation of the multiple conclusion sequent calculus, I present a proof-theoretic semantics for atomic sentences and their constituent names and predicates. The resulting system has several interesting features: (1) the rules are harmonious and stable; (2) the rules create a structure analogous to familiar model-theoretic semantics; and (3) the semantics is compositional, in that the rules for atomic sentences are determined by those for their constituent names and predicates.