Skip to main content
Log in

Some Closure Properties of Finite Definitions

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is no known syntactic characterization of the class of finite definitions in terms of a set of basic definitions and a set of basic operators under which the class is closed. Furthermore, it is known that the basic propositional operators do not preserve finiteness. In this paper I survey these problems and explore operators that do preserve finiteness. I also show that every definition that uses only unary predicate symbols and equality is bound to be finite.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gupta, A., and N. Belnap, The Revision Theory of Truth, MIT Press, 1993.

  2. 'On Circular Concepts', in: Circularity, Definition and Truth, A. Chapuis and A. Gupta (eds.), Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 2000.

  3. Kremer, Ph., 'The Gupta-Belnap systems S * and S # are not axiomatisable', Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 34 (4), 583-596, Fall 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. van den Dries, L., Tame Topology and O-minimal Structures, Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martinez, M. Some Closure Properties of Finite Definitions. Studia Logica 68, 43–68 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011998021743

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011998021743

Navigation