Skip to main content

Lattices of Intermediate Theories via Ruitenburg’s Theorem

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Language, Logic, and Computation (TbiLLC 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13206))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 401 Accesses

Abstract

For every univariate formula \(\chi \) (i.e., containing at most one atomic proposition) we introduce a lattice of intermediate theories: the lattice of \(\chi \)-logics. The key idea to define \(\chi \)-logics is to interpret atomic propositions as fixpoints of the formula \(\chi ^2\), which can be characterised syntactically using Ruitenburg’s theorem. We show that \(\chi \)-logics form a lattice, dually isomorphic to a special class of varieties of Heyting algebras. This approach allows us to build and describe five distinct lattices—corresponding to the possible fixpoints of univariate formulas—among which the lattice of negative variants of intermediate logics.

We would like to thank Nick Bezhanishvili for comments and discussions on this work. Also, we would like to thank the two anonymous referees for several useful remarks and suggestions. The first author was supported by the European Research Council (ERC, grant agreement number 680220). The second author was supported by Research Funds of the University of Helsinki.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Kripke semantics is known to be incomplete for some intermediate logics, and it is still an open problem whether Beth and topological semantics are complete [2, 19].

  2. 2.

    We indicate with \(\le \) the standard ordering induced by the lattice operations, that is, \(a \le b\) iff \(a \wedge _H b = a\).

  3. 3.

    Admittedly, we are using an improper terminology (also adopted, e.g., in [7, Sec. 7]): varieties are proper classes, hence we cannot talk about the set of all varieties nor about the lattice of all varieties. A way to dispense of this problem is to instead consider a lattice consisting of equational theories, that is, sets of algebraic identities defined by a class of algebras (see, e.g., [6, Section 14] for an overview of this account). To simplify our presentation we abstract away from these issues and we maintain the terminology “lattice of varieties”.

  4. 4.

    As a consequence of Lemma 7, in the current setting this is essentially the only case for which the map \(\boldsymbol{\chi }^2\) is not a nucleus. We can find other counterexamples if we lift the restriction of \(\chi \) being univariate.

  5. 5.

    We are omitting the line on top of \(\boldsymbol{\delta }\) in favor of readability.

  6. 6.

    To lighten the notation, we use the symbol \(\mathsf {Var}^{\chi }\) instead of \(\mathsf {Var}^{\chi }|_{\mathbf {IL}^{\chi }}\) for the function obtained by restricting the domain, omitting the explicit restriction of the domain. The same applies for the notation \(\mathsf {Log}^{\chi }\), used instead of \(\mathsf {Log}^{\chi }|_{\mathbf {HA}^{\chi }}\).

  7. 7.

    We borrow this terminology from [7, Sec. 7.8]: an external characterization of a \(\chi \)-variety \(\mathcal {X}\) means a representation of \(\mathcal {X}\) by means of equations, as opposed to an internal characterizations which “does not involve identities, [...] but uses only purely algebraic tools such as various kinds of operations on algebras”.

References

  1. Bezhanishvili, G., Holliday, W.H.: Locales, nuclei, and dragalin frames. In: Beklemishev, L., Demri, S., Máté, A. (eds.) Advances in Modal Logic, vol. 11 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bezhanishvili, G., Holliday, W.H.: A semantic hierarchy for intuitionistic logic. Indag. Math. 30(3), 403–469 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Bezhanishvili, N., Grilletti, G., Holliday, W.H.: Algebraic and topological semantics for inquisitive logic via choice-free duality. In: Iemhoff, R., Moortgat, M., de Queiroz, R. (eds.) WoLLIC 2019. LNCS, vol. 11541, pp. 35–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59533-6_3

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bezhanishvili, N., Grilletti, G., Quadrellaro, D.E.: An algebraic approach to inquisitive and DNA-logics. Rev. Symb. Log. 1–14 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1017/S175502032100054X

  5. Birkhoff, G.: On the structure of abstract algebras. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 31(4), 433–454 (1935)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Burris, S., Sankappanavar, H.P.: A Course in Universal Algebra. Springer, New York (1981)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Chagrov, A., Zakharyaschev, M.: Modal Logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Ciardelli, I.: Inquisitive semantics and intermediate logics. MSc thesis, University of Amsterdam (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ciardelli, I.: Questions in logic. Ph.D. thesis, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ciardelli, I., Groenendijk, J., Roelofsen, F.: Inquisitive Semantics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2019)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Ciardelli, I., Roelofsen, F.: Inquisitive logic. J. Philos. Log. 40(1), 55–94 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Esakia, L.: Heyting Algebras: Duality Theory, vol. 50, 1st edn. Springer, Cham (2019)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Font, J.M.: Abstract Algebraic Logic. College Publication, London (2016)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Gabbay, D.: Semantical Investigations in Heyting’s Intuitionistic Logic, vol. 148. Springer, Dordrecht (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2977-2

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Holliday, W.H.: Inquisitive intuitionistic logic. In: Olivetti, N., Verbrugge, R., Negri, S., Sandu, G. (eds.) Advances in Modal Logic, vol. 13 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Iemhoff, R., Yang, F.: Structural completeness in propositional logics of dependence. Arch. Math. Log. 55, 955–975 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-016-0505-8

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Jankov, V.: On the relation between deducibility in intuitionistic propositional calculus and finite implicative structures. Soviet Mathematics Doklady 151, 1294–1294 (1963)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Jankov, V.: The construction of a sequence of strongly independent superintuitionistic propositional calculi. Soviet Mathematics Doklady 9, 806–807 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kuznetsov, A.V.: Superintuitionistic logics. Mat. Issled. 10(2(36)), 150–158, 284–285 (1975). (Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Miglioli, P., Moscato, U., Ornaghi, M., Quazza, S., Usberti, G.: Some results on intermediate constructive logics. Notre Dame J. Form. Log. 30(4), 543–562 (1989)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Nishimura, I.: On formulas of one variable in intuitionistic propositional calculus. J. Symb. Log. 25(4), 327–331 (1960)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Quadrellaro, D.E.: Lattices of DNA-logics and algebraic semantics of inquisitive logic. MSc thesis, University of Amsterdam (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rasiowa, H., Sikorski, R.: The Mathematics of Metamathematics. Monografie matematyczne, vol. 41, 3 edn. Polish Scientific Publications (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rieger, L.S.: On the lattice theory of Brouwerian propositional logic. Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitatis Carolinae (Prague). Spisy Vydávané Příridorědeckou Fakultou University Karlovy, vol. 1949, no. 189 (1949)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roelofsen, F.: Algebraic foundations for inquisitive semantics. In: van Ditmarsch, H., Lang, J., Ju, S. (eds.) LORI 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6953, pp. 233–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24130-7_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ruitenburg, W.: On the period of sequences (\(A^n(p)\)) in intuitionistic propositional calculus. J. Symb. Log. 49(3), 892–899 (1984)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Santocanale, L., Ghilardi, S.: Ruitenburg’s theorem via duality and bounded bisimulations. In: Advances in Modal Logic, Bern, Switzerland (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tarski, A.: A remark on functionally free algebras. Ann. Math. 47(1), 163–166 (1946)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Väänänen, J.: Dependence Logic: A New Approach to Independence Friendly Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Wronski, A.: Intermediate logics and the disjunction property. Rep. Math. Log. 1, 39–51 (1973)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davide Emilio Quadrellaro .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

A Proof of Lemma 7

A Proof of Lemma 7

Proof

(Proof of Lemma 7). As shown in [21, 24], the following is a presentation of all the non-constant univariate intuitiornistic formulas modulo logical equivalence:

$$\begin{aligned} \beta _1 := p \qquad \beta _{n+1} := \alpha _n \vee \beta _n \qquad \alpha _1 := \lnot p \qquad \alpha _{n+1} := \alpha _n \rightarrow \beta _n. \end{aligned}$$

We consider the following two properties for a univariate formula \(\phi \):

  1. 1.

    \(\lnot \lnot \phi \equiv \top \).

  2. 2.

    If \(\psi \) has property 1, then .

In particular, if \(\phi \) has both properties then \(\phi ^2 \equiv \top \), that is, the fix-point of \(\phi \) is \(\top \).

Firstly notice that

$$\begin{aligned} \alpha _5 = ((\lnot \lnot p) \rightarrow p\vee \lnot p) \rightarrow (\lnot p \vee \lnot \lnot p) \qquad \beta _5 = ((\lnot \lnot p) \rightarrow p\vee \lnot p) \rightarrow (\lnot \lnot p \rightarrow p) \end{aligned}$$

have both properties.

figure d
figure e

Moreover, we can show that, if \(\alpha _n\) and \(\beta _n\) have both properties, then this holds for \(\alpha _{n+1}\) and \(\beta _{n+1}\) too.

figure f
figure g

So, by induction all the formulas \(\alpha _n, \beta _n\) with \(n\ge 5\) have index at most 2 and fixpoint \(\top \). As for the remaining formulas, one can easily show their fix-points are as follows:

This concludes the proof.    \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Grilletti, G., Quadrellaro, D.E. (2022). Lattices of Intermediate Theories via Ruitenburg’s Theorem. In: Özgün, A., Zinova, Y. (eds) Language, Logic, and Computation. TbiLLC 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13206. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98479-3_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98479-3_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-98478-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-98479-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics