The primal framework. I

John T. Baldwin; Saharon Shelah

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/9201241

The primal framework. I

John T. Baldwin·Saharon Shelah

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This the first of a series of articles dealing with abstract classification theory. The apparatus to assign systems of cardinal invariants to models of a first order theory (or determine its impossibility) is developed in [Sh:a]. It is natural to try to extend this theory to classes of models which are described in other ways. Work on the classification theory for nonelementary classes [Sh:88] and for universal classes [Sh:300] led to the conclusion that an axiomatic approach provided the best setting for developing a theory of wider application. In the first chapter we describe the axioms on which the remainder of the article depends and give some examples and context to justify this level of generality. The study of universal classes takes as a primitive the notion of closing a subset under functions to obtain a model. We replace that concept by the notion of a prime model. We begin the detailed discussion of this idea in Chapter II. One of the important contributions of classification theory is the recognition that large models can often be analyzed by means of a family of small models indexed by a tree of height at most omega. More precisely, the analyzed model is prime over such a tree. Chapter III provides sufficient conditions for prime models over such trees to exist.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

John T. Baldwin, Saharon Shelah. 1990-01-15. The primal framework. I. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9201241

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗