2016
DOI: 10.1002/malq.201600066
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpreting weak Kőnig's lemma in theories of nonstandard arithmetic

Abstract: We show how to interpret weak Kőnig's lemma in some recently defined theories of nonstandard arithmetic in all finite types. Two types of interpretations are described, with very different verifications. The celebrated conservation result of Friedman's about weak Kőnig's lemma can be proved using these interpretations. We also address some issues concerning the collecting of witnesses in herbrandized functional interpretations.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…3. we are in line with the argument that nonstandard methods can be used to analyse compactness arguments [8,7,6,5].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…3. we are in line with the argument that nonstandard methods can be used to analyse compactness arguments [8,7,6,5].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…the previous theorem does not lead to a contradiction. Moreover, the first part of the theorem, involving a classical system, has been proved in [4], and the proof in the latter seems to go through in our (semi-)intuitionistic setting.…”
Section: 2mentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Weak Kőnig's Lemma. As shown in [DF17], WKL 0 (one of the Big Five systems from Reverse Mathematics) is interpretable, over a nonstandard version of primitive recursive arithmetic with extensionality, using a version of the Axiom of Choice and Idealization. It relies on distinguishing two sorts: the number sort is interpreted by the standard numbers, and the set sort is interpreted by bounded type 1 functionals (or by number codes, both standard and nonstandard, of finite sets of numbers, again both standard and nonstandard).…”
Section: Llpomentioning
confidence: 99%