This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (September 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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 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 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 for which there exists a notation in Kleene's sense such that proves that is an ordinal notation. Equivalently, it is the supremum of all ordinals such that there exists a recursive relation on (the set of natural numbers) that well-orders it with ordinal and such that proves transfinite induction of arithmetical statements for .

Ordinal notations

Some theories, such as subsystems of second-order arithmetic, have no conceptualization of or way to make arguments about transfinite ordinals. For example, to formalize what it means for a subsystem of Z2 to "prove well-ordered", we instead construct an ordinal notation with order type . can now work with various transfinite induction principles along , 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 that is well-founded iff PA is consistent,[2]p. 3 despite having order type - including such a notation in the ordinal analysis of PA would result in the false equality .

Upper bound

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

Examples

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω2

Theories with proof-theoretic ordinal ω3

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)

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

Unsolved problem in mathematics:

What is the proof-theoretic ordinal of full second-order arithmetic?[4]

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 , full second-order arithmetic () 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
,
,
, ,
[1] ,
, ,
[7]: 40 
, , , [8]p. 8 [9]p. 869
,[10] [11]: 8 
[12]p. 959
,[13][11] ,[14]: 7  [13]p. 17, [13]p. 5
, [13]p. 52
, [15]
, [16]p. 17, [16]p. 17 [17]p. 140, [17]p. 140, [17]p. 140, [8]p. 8 [9]p. 870
[8]p. 27, [8]p. 27
[18]p.9
[2]
,[19] , [16]p. 22, [16]p. 22, [20] , , ,[21] [22]p. 26 [9]p. 878, [9]p. 878 ,
[23]p.13
[24]
[14]: 7 
[14]: 7 
, [25] [26]p.1167, [26]p.1167
[25] [26]p.1167, [26]p.1167
[25]: 11 
[27]p.233, [27]p.233 [28]p.276 [28]p.276
[27]p.233, [14] [28]p.277 [28]p.277
[14]: 7 
,[29] [14]: 7 
[14]: 7 
[3] [8]p. 8 ,[2] , [9]p. 869
[8]p. 31, [8]p. 31, [8]p. 31
[30]
[8]p. 33, [8]p. 33, [8]p. 33
[4] , [22]p. 26, [22]p. 26, [22]p. 26, [22]p. 26, [22]p. 26 [22]p. 26, [22]p. 26
,
[31]
[32]p. 14
[33]
[31]
[31]
[5]
,
[6]
, , [34] ,
, , ,, , [34]: 72  ,[34]: 72  [34]: 72  , [34]: 72 
, , [34]: 72  [34]: 72 
, , [34]: 72  [34]: 72 
, , [34]: 72 
, , [34]: 72  , [34]: 72 
, , [34]: 72  , [34]: 72 
[7] ,
[35]: 38 
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12] [36]
[13]
[14]
[37]

Key

This is a list of symbols used in this table:

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

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

See also

Notes

1.^ For
2.^ The Veblen function with countably infinitely iterated least fixed points.[clarification needed]
3.^ Can also be commonly written as in Madore's ψ.
4.^ Uses Madore's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
5.^ Can also be commonly written as in Madore's ψ.
6.^ represents the first recursively weakly compact ordinal. Uses Arai's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
7.^ Also the proof-theoretic ordinal of , as the amount of weakening given by the W-types is not enough.
8.^ represents the first inaccessible cardinal. Uses Jäger's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
9.^ represents the limit of the -inaccessible cardinals. Uses (presumably) Jäger's ψ.
10.^ represents the limit of the -inaccessible cardinals. Uses (presumably) Jäger's ψ.
11.^ represents the first Mahlo cardinal. Uses Rathjen's ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
12.^ represents the first weakly compact cardinal. Uses Rathjen's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
13.^ represents the first -indescribable cardinal. Uses Stegert's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
14.^ is the smallest such that ' is -indescribable') and ' is -indescribable '). Uses Stegert's Ψ rather than Buchholz's ψ.
15.^ represents the first Mahlo cardinal. Uses (presumably) Rathjen's ψ.

Citations

  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. ^ Krajicek, Jan (1995). Bounded Arithmetic, Propositional Logic and Complexity Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 18–20. ISBN 9780521452052. 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 Rose, H. E. (1984). Subrecursion: functions and hierarchies. University of Michigan: Clarendon Press. ISBN 9780198531890.
  4. ^ M. Rathjen, Proof Theory: From Arithmetic to Set Theory (p.28). Accessed 14 August 2022.
  5. ^ Rathjen, Michael (2006), "The art of ordinal analysis" (PDF), International Congress of Mathematicians, vol. II, Zürich: Eur. Math. Soc., pp. 45–69, MR 2275588, archived from the original on 2009-12-22((citation)): CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  6. ^ D. Madore, A Zoo of Ordinals (2017, p.2). Accessed 12 August 2022.
  7. ^ Jeroen Van der Meeren; Rathjen, Michael; Weiermann, Andreas (2014). "An order-theoretic characterization of the Howard-Bachmann-hierarchy". arXiv:1411.4481 [math.LO].
  8. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Second order theories with ordinals and elementary comprehension".
  9. ^ a b c d e G. Jäger, "The Strength of Admissibility Without Foundation". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 49, no. 3 (1984).
  10. ^ B. Afshari, M. Rathjen, "Ordinal Analysis and the Infinite Ramsey Theorem" (2012)
  11. ^ a b Marcone, Alberto; Montalbán, Antonio (2011). "The Veblen functions for computability theorists". The Journal of Symbolic Logic. 76 (2): 575–602. arXiv:0910.5442. doi:10.2178/jsl/1305810765. S2CID 675632.
  12. ^ 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.
  13. ^ a b c d M. Heissenbüttel, "Theories of ordinal strength and " (2001)
  14. ^ a b c d e f g D. Probst, "A modular ordinal analysis of metapredicative subsystems of second-order arithmetic" (2017)
  15. ^ A. Cantini, "On the relation between choice and comprehension principles in second order arithmetic", Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 51 (1986), pp. 360--373.
  16. ^ a b c d A bot will complete this citation soon. Click here to jump the queue arXiv:2007.07188.
  17. ^ 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.
  18. ^ 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).
  19. ^ 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).
  20. ^ 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.
  21. ^ 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.
  22. ^ a b c d e f g h U. Buchholtz, G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Theories of proof-theoretic strength ". In Concepts of Proof in Mathematics, Philosophy, and Computer Science (2016), ed. D. Probst, P. Schuster. DOI 10.1515/9781501502620-007.
  23. ^ 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
  24. ^ G. Jäger, T. Strahm, "Fixed point theories and dependent choice". Archive for Mathematical Logic vol. 39 (2000), pp.493--508.
  25. ^ a b c T. Strahm, "Autonomous fixed point progressions and fixed point transfinite recursion" (2000)
  26. ^ a b c d C. Rüede, "Transfinite dependent choice and ω-model reflection". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 67, no. 3 (2002).
  27. ^ a b c C. Rüede, "The proof-theoretic analysis of Σ11 transfinite dependent choice". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 122 (2003).
  28. ^ a b c d T. Strahm, "Wellordering Proofs for Metapredicative Mahlo". Journal of Symbolic Logic vol. 67, no. 1 (2002)
  29. ^ F. Ranzi, T. Strahm, "A flexible type system for the small Veblen ordinal" (2019). Archive for Mathematical Logic 58: 711–751.
  30. ^ K. Fujimoto, "Notes on some second-order systems of iterated inductive definitions and -comprehensions and relevant subsystems of set theory". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 166 (2015), pp. 409--463.
  31. ^ a b c Krombholz, Martin; Rathjen, Michael (2019). "Upper bounds on the graph minor theorem". arXiv:1907.00412 [math.LO].
  32. ^ W. Buchholz, S. Feferman, W. Pohlers, W. Sieg, Iterated Inductive Definitions and Subsystems of Analysis: Recent Proof-Theoretical Studies
  33. ^ W. Buchholz, Proof Theory of Impredicative Subsystems of Analysis (Studies in Proof Theory, Monographs, Vol 2 (1988)
  34. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n M. Rathjen, "Investigations of Subsystems of Second Order Arithmetic and Set Theory in Strength between and : Part I". Accessed 21 September 2023.
  35. ^ M. Rathjen, "The Strength of Some Martin-Löf Type Theories"
  36. ^ M. Rathjen, "Proof Theory of Reflection". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic vol. 68, iss. 2 (1994), pp.181--224.
  37. ^ Arai, Toshiyasu (2022-01-10). "An ordinal analysis of $\Pi_{1}$-Collection". arXiv:2112.09871 [math.LO].

References