Skip to main content
Log in

A logical study of the correspondence relation

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. E. W. Adams, Axiomatic Foundations of Rigid Body Mechanics. Unpublished diss., Stanford University, 1955.

  2. K. J. Barwise, ‘Axioms for abstract model theory’, Annals of Mathematical Logic 7 (1974), 221–265.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Bell and M. Machover, A Course in Mathematical Logic. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  4. H. B. Enderton, A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, New York-London, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Feferman, ‘Two notes on abstract model theory I’, Fundamenta Mathematica 82 (1974), 153–165.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. Friedman, ‘Is intertheoretic reduction feasible?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 33 (1982), 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. Gaifman, ‘Operations on relational structures, functors and classes I in L. Henkin et al. (eds), Proceedings of the Tarski Symposium, A.M.S. Proc. Symp. in Pure Math. 25, A.M.S., Providence, R.I., 1974, pp. 21–39.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Goldblatt, Topoi: A Categorial Analysis of Logic. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  9. W. Krajewski, Correspondence Principle and Growth of Science. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Machover and J. Hirschfeld, Lectures on Non-Standard Analysis. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 94, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Maclane, Categories for the Working Mathematicians. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Mayr, ‘Investigations of the concept of reduction I’, Erkenntnis 10 (1976), 275–294.

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Mayr, ‘Investigations of the concept of reduction II’, Erkenntnis 17 (1981), 109–129.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. C. C. McKinsey, A. C. Sugar, and P. Suppes, ‘Axiomatic foundations of classical particle mechanics’, Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2 (1953), 253–272.

    Google Scholar 

  15. C. U. Moulines, Intertheoretic approximation: the Kepler-Newton case, Synthese 45 (1980), 387–412.

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Pearce, ‘A mathematical characterization of interpretation, reduction and definitional equivalence’, Studia Logica (forthocoming).

  17. D. Pearce and V. Rantala, ‘New foundations for metascience’, Synthese 56 (1983), pp. 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Pearce and V. Rantala, ‘Constructing general models of theory dynamics’, Studia Logica (forthcoming).

  19. D. Pearce and V. Rantala, ‘Logical aspects of scientific reduction’, in P. Weingartner and H. Czermak (eds), Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, Vienna, 1983, pp. 333–336.

  20. D. Pearce and V. Rantala, ‘The logical study of symmetries in scientific change’, ibid., pp. 330-332.

  21. H. R. Post, ‘Correspondence, invariance and heuristics: in parise of conservative induction’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2 (1971), 213–255.

    Google Scholar 

  22. V. Rantala, ‘Correspondence and non-standard models: a case study’, in I. Niiniluoto and R. Tuomela (eds), The Logic and Epsitemology of Scientific Change. Acta Philosophica Fennica 30, Nos. 2–4, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979, pp. 366–378.

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. L. G. Redhead, ‘Symmetry in intertheory relation’, Synthese 32 (1975), 77–112.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. Robinson, ‘Non-standard analysis’, Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Sciences (A) 64 (1961), 432–440.

    Google Scholar 

  25. A. Robinson, Non-Standard Analysis. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  26. A. Robinson and E. Zakon, ‘A set-theoretical characterization of enlargements’, in W. A. J. Luxemburg (ed.), Applications of Model Theory to Algebra, Analysis, and Probability. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1969, pp. 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Rubin and P. Suppes, ‘Transformations of systems of relativistic particle mechanics’, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 4 (1954), 563–601.

    Google Scholar 

  28. J. R. Shoenfield, Mathematical Logic. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. D. Sneed, The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  30. W. Stegmüller, The Structure and Dynamics of Theories. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg-Berlin, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  31. W. Stegmüller, The Structuralist View of Theories. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg-Berlin, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  32. K. Stroyan and W. A. J. Luxemburg, Introduction to the Theory of Infinitesimals. Academic Press, New York, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  33. P. Suppes, Introduction to Logic. Van Nostrand, New York, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  34. L. W. Szczerba, ‘Interpretability of elementary theories’, in R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds), Logic, Foundations of Mathematics, and Computability Theory. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  35. R. Wójcicki, Topics in the Formal Methodology of Empirical Sciences. D. Reidel, Dordrecht and Ossolineum, Wroclaw, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pearce, D., Rantala, V. A logical study of the correspondence relation. J Philos Logic 13, 47–84 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00297577

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00297577

Keywords

Navigation