Recursive definitions and fixed-points on well-founded structures

An expression such as ∀ x ( P ( x ) ↔ ϕ ( P ) ) , where P occurs in ϕ ( P ) , does not always define P . When such an expression implicitly defines P , in the sense of Beth (1953) [1] and Padoa (1900) [13], we call it a recursive definition. In the Least Fixed-Point Logic (LFP), we have theories whe...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Theoretical computer science Ročník 412; číslo 37; s. 4893 - 4904
Hlavní autori: Ferreira, Francicleber Martins, Martins, Ana Teresa
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: Elsevier B.V 26.08.2011
Predmet:
ISSN:0304-3975, 1879-2294
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:An expression such as ∀ x ( P ( x ) ↔ ϕ ( P ) ) , where P occurs in ϕ ( P ) , does not always define P . When such an expression implicitly defines P , in the sense of Beth (1953) [1] and Padoa (1900) [13], we call it a recursive definition. In the Least Fixed-Point Logic (LFP), we have theories where interesting relations can be recursively defined (Ebbinghaus, 1995 [4], Libkin, 2004 [12]). We will show that for some sorts of recursive definitions there are explicit definitions on sufficiently strong theories of LFP. It is known that LFP, restricted to finite models, does not have Beth’s Definability Theorem (Gurevich, 1996 [7], Hodkinson, 1993 [8], Dawar, 1995 [3]). Beth’s Definability Theorem states that, if a relation is implicitly defined, then there is an explicit definition for it. We will also give a proof that Beth’s Definability Theorem fails for LFP without this finite model restriction. We will investigate fragments of LFP for which Beth’s Definability Theorem holds, specifically theories whose models are well-founded structures.
Bibliografia:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0304-3975
1879-2294
DOI:10.1016/j.tcs.2011.01.028