Open Least Element Principle and Bounded Query Computation

  • L. D. Beklemishev
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1683)


We show that elementaryarithmetic formulated in the language with a free function symbol f and the least element principle for open formulas (where we assume that the symbols for all elementary functions are included in the language) does not prove the least element principle for bounded formulas in the same language. A related result is that composition and anyn umber of unnested applications of bounded minimum operator are, in general, insufficient to generate the elementary closure of a function, even if all elementaryfunctions are available. Thus, unnested bounded minimum operator is weaker than unnested bounded recursion.


Elementary Function Function Symbol Proof Theory Simple Program Peano Arithmetic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    L.D. Beklemishev. Induction rules, reflection principles, and provablyrecursiv e functions. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 85:193–242, 1997.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    L.D. Beklemishev. A proof-theoretic analysis of collection. Archive for Mathematical Logic, 37:275–296, 1998.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    S.R. Buss. Introduction to Proof Theory. In S.R. Buss, editor, Handbook of Proof Theory, pages 1–78. Elsevier, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Clote and J. Krajíček. Open problems. In P. Clote and J. Krajíček, editors, Arithmetic, Proof Theory, and Computational Complexity, pages 1–19. Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Gaifman and C. Dimitracopoulos. Fragments of Peano’s arithmetic and the MDRP theorem. In Logic and algorithmic (Zurich, 1980), (Monograph. Enseign. Math., 30), pages 187–206. Genève, Universityof Genève, 1982.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Hájek and P. Pudlák. Metamathematics of First Order Arithmetic. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New-York, 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Krajíček. Bounded arithmetic, Propositional logic, and Complexity theory. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, 1995.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. Kristiansen. Fragments of Peano arithmetic and subrecursive degrees. Manuscript, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Parsons. Hierarchies of primitive recursive functions. Zeitschrift f. math. Logik und Grundlagen d. Math., 14(4):357–376, 1968.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.E. Rose. Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1984.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. D. Beklemishev
    • 1
  1. 1.Steklov Mathematical InstituteGubkina 8Russia

Personalised recommendations