BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Thomas F. Icard

Thomas F. Icard contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer Sciencemath.LO

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Completeness Result for Inequational Reasoning in a Full Higher-Order Setting

This paper obtains a completeness result for inequational reasoning with applicative terms without variables in a setting where the intended semantic models are the full structures, the full type hierarchies over preorders for the base types. The syntax allows for the specification that a given symbol be interpreted as a monotone function, or an antitone function, or both. There is a natural set of five rules for inequational reasoning. One can add variables and also add a substitution rule, but we observe that this logic would be incomplete for full structures. This is why the completeness result in this paper pertains to terms without variables. Since the completeness is already known for the class of general (Henkin) structures, we are interested in full structures. We present a completeness theorem. Our result is not optimal because we restrict to base preorders which have a weak completeness property: every pair of elements has an upper bound and a lower bound. To compensate we add several rules to the logic. We also present extensions and variations of our completeness result.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Provability and interpretability logics with restricted realizations

The provability logic of a theory T is the set of modal formulas, which under any arithmetical realization are provable in T . We slightly modify this notion by requiring the arithmetical realizations to come from a specified set $Γ$. We make an analogous modification for interpretability logics. This is a paper from 2012. We first studied provability logics with restricted realizations, and show that for various natural candidates of theory T and restriction set $Γ$, where each sentence in $Γ$ has a well understood (meta)-mathematical content in T, the result is the logic of linear frames. However, for the theory Primitive Recursive Arithmetic (PRA), we define a fragment that gives rise to a more interesting provability logic, by capitalizing on the well-studied relationship between PRA and I$Σ_1$. We then study interpretability logics, obtaining some upper bounds for IL(PRA), whose characterization remains a major open question in interpretability logic. Again this upper bound is closely relatively to linear frames. The technique is also applied to yield the non-trivial result that IL(PRA) $\subset$ ILM.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access