Lev Beklemishev

We provide a variant of an axiomatization of elementary geometry based on logical axioms in the spirit of Huzita–Justin axioms for the origami constructions. We isolate the fragments corresponding to natural classes of origami constructions such as Pythagorean, Euclidean, and full origami constructions. The set of origami constructible points for each of the classes of constructions provides the minimal model of the corresponding set of logical axioms. Our axiomatizations are based on Wu’s axioms for orthogonal geometry and some modifications of Huzita–Justin axioms. We work out bi-interpretations between these logical theories and theories of fields as described in Makowsky (2018). Using a theorem of Ziegler (1982) which implies that the first order theory of Vieta fields is undecidable, we conclude that the first order theory of our axiomatization of origami is also undecidable.

We study the arithmetical schema asserting that every eventually decreasing elementary recursive function has a limit. Some other related principles are also formulated. We establish their relationship with restricted parameter-free induction schemata. We also prove that the same principle, formulated as an inference rule, provides an axiomatization of the Σ2-consequences of IΣ1.Using these results we show that ILM is the logic of Π1-conservativity of any reasonable extension of parameter-free Π1-induction schema. This result, however, cannot be much improved: by adapting a theorem of D. Zambella and G. Mints we show that the logic of Π1-conservativity of primitive recursive arithmetic properly extends ILM.In the third part of the paper we give an ordinal classification of -consequences of the standard fragments of Peano arithmetic in terms of reflection principles. This is interesting in view of the general program of ordinal analysis of theories, which in the most standard cases classifies Π-classes of sentences.

We establish a natural translation from word rewriting systems to strictly positive polymodal logics. Thereby, the latter can be considered as a generalization of the former. As a corollary we obtain examples of undecidable finitely axiomatizable strictly positive normal modal logics. The translation has its counterpart on the level of proofs: we formulate a natural deep inference proof system for strictly positive logics generalizing derivations in word rewriting systems. We also make some observations and formulate open questions related to the theory of modal companions of superintuitionistic logics that was initiated by L.L. Maksimova and V.V. Rybakov.

We introduce the logics GLP Λ, a generalization of Japaridze’s polymodal provability logic GLP ω where Λ is any linearly ordered set representing a hierarchy of provability operators of increasing strength. We shall provide a reduction of these logics to GLP ω yielding among other things a finitary proof of the normal form theorem for the variable-free fragment of GLP Λ and the decidability of GLP Λ for recursive orderings Λ. Further, we give a restricted axiomatization of the variable-free fragment of GLP Λ.

For “natural enough” systems of ordinal notation we show that α times iterated local reflection schema over a sufficiently strong arithmetic T proves the same Π 1 0 -sentences as ω α times iterated consistency. A corollary is that the two hierarchies catch up modulo relative interpretability exactly at ε-numbers. We also derive the following more general “mixed” formulas estimating the consistency strength of iterated local reflection: for all ordinals α ⩾ 1 and all β, β ≡ Π 1 0 T ω α ·, α ≡ Π 1 0 T β + ω α. Here T α stands for α times iterated local reflection over T, T β stands for β times iterated consistency, and ≡ Π 1 0 denotes mutual Π 1 0 -conservativity. In an appendix to this paper we develop our notion of “natural enough” system of ordinal notation and show that such systems do exist for every recursive ordinal.

Progressions of iterated reflection principles can be used as a tool for the ordinal analysis of formal systems. We discuss various notions of proof-theoretic ordinals and compare the information obtained by means of the reflection principles with the results obtained by the more usual proof-theoretic techniques. In some cases we obtain sharper results, e.g., we define proof-theoretic ordinals relevant to logical complexity Π1 0 and, similarly, for any class Π n 0. We provide a more general version of the fine structure relationships for iterated reflection principles (due to U. Schmerl [25]). This allows us, in a uniform manner, to analyze main fragments of arithmetic axiomatized by restricted forms of induction, including IΣ n, IΣ n −, IΠ n − and their combinations. We also obtain new conservation results relating the hierarchies of uniform and local reflection principles. In particular, we show that (for a sufficiently broad class of theories T) the uniform Σ1-reflection principle for T is Σ2-conservative over the corresponding local reflection principle. This bears some corollaries on the hierarchies of restricted induction schemata in arithmetic and provides a key tool for our generalization of Schmerl's theorem.

A well-known result states that, over basic Kalmar elementary arithmetic EA, the induction schema for ∑n formulas is equivalent to the uniform reflection principle for ∑n + 1 formulas. We show that fragments of arithmetic axiomatized by various forms of induction rules admit a precise axiomatization in terms of reflection principles as well. Thus, the closure of EA under the induction rule for ∑n formulas is equivalent to ω times iterated ∑n reflection principle. Moreover, for k < ω, k times iterated ∑n reflection principle over EA precisely corresponds to the extension of EA by k nested applications of ∑n induction rule.The above relationship holds in greater generality than just stated. In fact, we give general formulas characterizing in terms of iterated reflection principles the extension of any given theory by k nested applications of ∑n or Πn induction rules. In particular, the closure of a theory T under just one application of ∑1 induction rule is equivalent to T together with ∑1 reflection principle for each finite Π2 axiomatized subtheory of T.These results have closely parallel ones in the theory of subrecursive function classes. The rules under study correspond, in a canonical way, to natural closure operators on the classes of provably recursive functions. Thus, ∑1 induction rule precisely corresponds to the primitive recursive closure operator, and ∑1 collection rule, introduced below, corresponds to the elementary closure operator.