Constructive Zermelo Fraenkel Set Theory Research Articles

Choice and independence of premise rules in intuitionistic set theory

Choice and independence of premise principles play an important role in characterizing Kreisel's modified realizability and Gödel's Dialectica interpretation. In this paper we show that a great many intuitionistic set theories are closed under the corresponding rules for finite types over N. It is also shown that the existence property (or existential definability property) holds for statements of the form ∃yσφ(y), where the variable y ranges over objects of finite type σ. This applies in particular to CZF (Constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory) and IZF (Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory), two systems known not to have the general existence property. On the technical side, the paper uses a method that amalgamates generic realizability for set theory with truth, whereby the underlying partial combinatory algebra is required to contain all objects of finite type.

Ordinal analysis and the set existence property for intuitionistic set theories.

On account of being governed by constructive logic, intuitionistic theories [Formula: see text] often enjoy various existence properties. The most common is the numerical existence property (NEP). It entails that an existential theorem of [Formula: see text] of the form [Formula: see text] can be witnessed by a numeral [Formula: see text] such that [Formula: see text] proves [Formula: see text]. While NEP holds almost universally for natural intuitionistic set theories, the general existence property (EP), i.e. the property of a theory that for every existential theorem, a provably definable witness can be found, is known to fail for some prominent intuitionistic set theories such as Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (IZF) and constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (CZF). Both of these theories are formalized with collection rather than replacement as the latter is often difficult to apply in an intuitionistic context because of the uniqueness requirement. In light of this, one is clearly tempted to single out collection as the culprit that stymies the EP in such theories. Beeson stated the following open problem: 'Does any reasonable set theory with collection have the existence property? and added in proof: The problem is still open for IZF with only bounded separation.' (Beeson. 1985 Foundations of constructive mathematics, p. 203. Berlin, Germany: Springer.) In this article, it is shown that IZF with bounded separation, that is, separation for formulas in which only bounded quantifiers of the forms [Formula: see text] are allowed, indeed has the EP. Moreover, it is also shown that CZF with the exponentiation axiom in place of the subset collection axiom has the EP. Crucially, in both cases, the proof involves a detour through ordinal analyses of infinitary systems of intuitionistic set theory, i.e. advanced techniques from proof theory. This article is part of the theme issue 'Modern perspectives in Proof Theory'.

EXTENSIONAL REALIZABILITY AND CHOICE FOR DEPENDENT TYPES IN INTUITIONISTIC SET THEORY

AbstractIn [17], we introduced an extensional variant of generic realizability [22], where realizers act extensionally on realizers, and showed that this form of realizability provides inner models of $\mathsf {CZF}$ (constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory) and $\mathsf {IZF}$ (intuitionistic Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory), that further validate $\mathsf {AC}_{\mathsf {FT}}$ (the axiom of choice in all finite types). In this paper, we show that extensional generic realizability validates several choice principles for dependent types, all exceeding $\mathsf {AC}_{\mathsf {FT}}$ . We then show that adding such choice principles does not change the arithmetic part of either $\mathsf {CZF}$ or $\mathsf {IZF}$ .

Extensional realizability for intuitionistic set theory

Abstract In generic realizability for set theories, realizers treat unbounded quantifiers generically. To this form of realizability, we add another layer of extensionality by requiring that realizers ought to act extensionally on realizers, giving rise to a realizability universe $\mathrm{V_{ex}}(A)$ in which the axiom of choice in all finite types, ${\textsf{AC}}_{{\textsf{FT}}}$, is realized, where $A$ stands for an arbitrary partial combinatory algebra. This construction furnishes ‘inner models’ of many set theories that additionally validate ${\textsf{AC}}_{{\textsf{FT}}}$, in particular it provides a self-validating semantics for ${\textsf{CZF}}$ (constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory) and ${\textsf{IZF}}$ (intuitionistic Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory). One can also add large set axioms and many other principles.

Power Kripke–Platek set theory and the axiom of choice

Abstract While power Kripke–Platek set theory, ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$, shares many properties with ordinary Kripke–Platek set theory, ${\textbf{KP}}$, in several ways it behaves quite differently from ${\textbf{KP}}$. This is perhaps most strikingly demonstrated by a result, due to Mathias, to the effect that adding the axiom of constructibility to ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$ gives rise to a much stronger theory, whereas in the case of ${\textbf{KP}}$, the constructible hierarchy provides an inner model, so that ${\textbf{KP}}$ and ${\textbf{KP}}+V=L$ have the same strength. This paper will be concerned with the relationship between ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$ and ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$ plus the axiom of choice or even the global axiom of choice, $\textbf{AC}_{\tiny {global}}$. Since $L$ is the standard vehicle to furnish a model in which this axiom holds, the usual argument for demonstrating that the addition of ${\textbf{AC}}$ or $\textbf{AC}_{\tiny {global}}$ to ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$ does not increase proof-theoretic strength does not apply in any obvious way. Among other tools, the paper uses techniques from ordinal analysis to show that ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})+\textbf{AC}_{\tiny {global}}$ has the same strength as ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$, thereby answering a question of Mathias. Moreover, it is shown that ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})+\textbf{AC}_{\tiny {global}}$ is conservative over ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})$ for $\varPi ^1_4$ statements of analysis. The method of ordinal analysis for theories with power set was developed in an earlier paper. The technique allows one to compute witnessing information from infinitary proofs, providing bounds for the transfinite iterations of the power set operation that are provable in a theory. As the theory ${\textbf{KP}}({\mathcal{P}})+\textbf{AC}_{\tiny {global}}$ provides a very useful tool for defining models and realizability models of other theories that are hard to construct without access to a uniform selection mechanism, it is desirable to determine its exact proof-theoretic strength. This knowledge can for instance be used to determine the strength of Feferman’s operational set theory with power set operation as well as constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice.

Preservation of choice principles under realizability

AbstractEspecially nice models of intuitionistic set theories are realizability models $V({\mathcal A})$, where $\mathcal A$ is an applicative structure or partial combinatory algebra. This paper is concerned with the preservation of various choice principles in $V({\mathcal A})$ if assumed in the underlying universe $V$, adopting Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel as background theory for all of these investigations. Examples of choice principles are the axiom schemes of countable choice, dependent choice, relativized dependent choice and the presentation axiom. It is shown that any of these axioms holds in $V(\mathcal{A})$ for every applicative structure $\mathcal A$ if it holds in the background universe.1 It is also shown that a weak form of the countable axiom of choice, $\textbf{AC}^{\boldsymbol{\omega , \omega }}$, is rendered true in any $V(\mathcal{A})$ regardless of whether it holds in the background universe. The paper extends work by McCarty (1984, Realizability and Recursive Mathematics, PhD Thesis) and Rathjen (2006, Realizability for constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. In Logic Colloquium 03, pp. 282–314).

Generalized geometric theories and set-generated classes

We introduce infinitary propositional theories over a set and their models which are subsets of the set, and define a generalized geometric theory as an infinitary propositional theory of a special form. The main result is thatthe class of models of a generalized geometric theory is set-generated. Here, a class$\mathcal{X}$of subsets of a set is set-generated if there exists a subsetGof$\mathcal{X}$such that for each α ∈$\mathcal{X}$, and finitely enumerable subset τ of α there exists a subset β ∈Gsuch that τ ⊆ β ⊆ α. We show the main result in the constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (CZF) with an additional axiom, called the set generation axiom which is derivable inCZF, both from the relativized dependent choice scheme and from a regular extension axiom. We give some applications of the main result to algebra, topology and formal topology.

Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory and the limited principle of omniscience

In recent years the question of whether adding the limited principle of omniscience, LPO, to constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, CZF, increases its strength has arisen several times. As the addition of excluded middle for atomic formulae to CZF results in a rather strong theory, i.e. much stronger than classical Zermelo set theory, it is not obvious that its augmentation by LPO would be proof-theoretically benign. The purpose of this paper is to show that CZF+RDC+LPO has indeed the same strength as CZF, where RDC stands for relativized dependent choice. In particular, these theories prove the same Π20 theorems of arithmetic.

Non-deterministic inductive definitions

We study a new proof principle in the context of constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory based on what we will call "non-deterministic inductive definitions". We give applications to formal topology as well as a predicative justification of this principle.

A generalized cut characterization of the fullness axiom in CZF

In the present note, we study a generalization of Dedekind cuts in the context of constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory CZF. For this purpose, we single out an equivalent of CZF's axiom of fulln ...

Derived rules for predicative set theory: An application of sheaves

We show how one may establish proof-theoretic results for constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, such as the compactness rule for Cantor space and the Bar Induction rule for Baire space, by constructing sheaf models and using their preservation properties.

From the weak to the strong existence property

A hallmark of many an intuitionistic theory is the existence property, EP, i.e., if the theory proves an existential statement then there is a provably definable witness for it. However, there are well known exceptions, for example, the full intuitionistic Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, IZF, does not have the existence property, where IZF is formulated with Collection. By contrast, the version of intuitionistic Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory formulated with Replacement, IZFR, has the existence property. Moreover, IZF does not even enjoy a weaker form of the existence property, wEP, defined by the slackened requirement of finding a provably definable set of witnesses for every existential theorem. In view of these results, one might be tempted to put the blame for the failure of the existence properties squarely on Collection. However, in this paper it is shown that several well known intuitionistic set theories with Collection have the weak existence property. Among these theories are CZF−, CZFE, and CZFP, i.e., respectively, constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (CZF) without subset Collection, CZF formulated with Exponentiation and also CZF augmented by the Power Set axiom (basically IZF with only bounded separation). As a result, the culprit preventing the weak existence property from obtaining must consist of a combination of Collection and unbounded Separation.To bring about these results we introduce a form of realizability based on general set recursive functions where a realizer for an existential statement provides a set of witnesses for the existential quantifier rather than a single witness. Moreover, this notion of realizability needs to be combined with truth to yield the desired results.This form of realizability is also utilized, albeit shorn of its truth component, in showing partial conservativity results for CZF−, CZFE, and CZFP over their intuitionistic counterparts IKP, IKP(E), and IKP(P), respectively.As it turns out, the combination of the weak existence property and partial conservativity of CZF− over IKP plus a further ingredient can be used to show that CZF− actually has the existence property. The additional ingredient is an advanced technique from proof theory (cut elimination and ordinal analysis of IKP). Roughly the same techniques can be deployed in showing that CZFE and CZFP have the stronger existence property, too. However, this requires a new form of ordinal analysis for theories with Power Set and Exponentiation (cf. Rathjen (2011) [39]) and is beyond the scope of the current paper.

Constructive toposes with countable sums as models of constructive set theory

We define a constructive topos to be a locally cartesian closed pretopos. The terminology is supported by the fact that constructive toposes enjoy a relationship with constructive set theory similar to the relationship between elementary toposes and (impredicative) intuitionistic set theory. This paper elaborates upon one aspect of the relationship between constructive toposes and constructive set theory. We show that any constructive topos with countable coproducts provides a model of a standard constructive set theory, CZFExp (that is, the variant of Aczel’s Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory CZF obtained by weakening Subset Collection to the Exponentiation axiom). The model is constructed as a category of classes, using ideas derived from Joyal and Moerdijk’s programme of algebraic set theory. A curiosity is that our model always validates the axiom V=Vω1 (in an appropriate formulation). It follows that the full Separation schema is always refuted.

A predicative completion of a uniform space

We give a predicative construction of a completion of a uniform space in the constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory.

On the constructive Dedekind reals

In order to build the collection of Cauchy reals as a set in constructive set theory, the only power set-like principle needed is exponentiation. In contrast, the proof that the Dedekind reals form a set has seemed to require more than that. The main purpose here is to show that exponentiation alone does not suffice for the latter, by furnishing a Kripke model of constructive set theory, Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with subset collection replaced by exponentiation, in which the Cauchy reals form a set while the Dedekind reals constitute a proper class.

The shrinking principle and the axiom of choice

The axiom of choice is equivalent to the shrinking principle: every indexed cover of a set has a refinement with the same index set which is a partition. A simple and direct proof of this equivalence is given within an elementary fragment of constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. Variants of the shrinking principle are discussed, and it is related to a similar but different principle formulated by Vaught.

Binary Refinement Implies Discrete Exponentiation

Working in the weakening of constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory in which the subset collection scheme is omitted, we show that the binary re.nement principle implies all the instances of the exponentiation axiom in which the basis is a discrete set. In particular binary re.nement implies that the class of detachable subsets of a set form a set. Binary re.nement was originally extracted from the fullness axiom, an equivalent of subset collection, as a principle that was su.cient to prove that the Dedekind reals form a set. Here we show that the Cauchy reals also form a set. More generally, binary refinement ensures that one remains in the realm of sets when one starts from discrete sets and one applies the operations of exponentiation and binary product a finite number of times.

Characterizing the interpretation of set theory in Martin-Löf type theory

Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, CZF, can be interpreted in Martin-Löf type theory via the so-called propositions-as-types interpretation. However, this interpretation validates more than what is provable in CZF. We now ask ourselves: is there a reasonably simple axiomatization (by a few axiom schemata say) of the set-theoretic formulae validated in Martin-Löf type theory? The answer is yes for a large collection of statements called the mathematical formulae. The validated mathematical formulae can be axiomatized by suitable forms of the axiom of choice. The paper builds on a self-interpretation of CZF (developed in [M. Rathjen, The formulae-as-classes interpretation of constructive set theory, in: Proof Technology and Computation (Proceedings of the International Summer School Marktoberdorf 2003) IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2004 (in press)]) that provides an “inner” model of CZF which also validates the so-called Π Σ -axiom of choice, ΠΣ – AC . The crucial technical step taken in the present paper is to investigate the absoluteness properties of this model under the hypothesis ΠΣ – AC . It is also shown that CZF plus the Π Σ -axiom of choice possesses the disjunction property, the numerical existence property and the existence property for an important group of formulae.

The disjunction and related properties for constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory

AbstractThis paper proves that the disjunction property, the numerical existence property. Church's rule, and several other metamathematical properties hold true for Constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory, CZF, and also for the theory CZF augmented by the Regular Extension Axiom.As regards the proof technique, it features a self-validating semantics for CZF that combines realizability for extensional set theory and truth.

On constructing completions

AbstractThe Dedekind cuts in an ordered set form a set in the sense of constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. We deduce this statement from the principle of refinement, which we distill before from the axiom of fullness. Together with exponentiation, refinement is equivalent to fullness. None of the defining properties of an ordering is needed, and only refinement for two–element coverings is used.In particular, the Dedekind reals form a set: whence we have also refined an earlier result by Aczel and Rathjen, who invoked the full form of fullness. To further generalise this, we look at Richman's method to complete an arbitrary metric space without sequences, which he designed to avoid countable choice. The completion of a separable metric space turns out to be a set even if the original space is a proper class: in particular, every complete separable metric space automatically is a set.