Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with lo.logic
Search options not deleted
user 39422
first-order and higher-order logic, model theory, set theory, proof theory, computability theory, formal languages, definability, interplay of syntax and semantics, constructive logic, intuitionism, philosophical logic, modal logic, completeness, Gödel incompleteness, decidability, undecidability, theories of truth, truth revision, consistency.
2
votes
0
answers
136
views
The premises of Aczel's inductive definitions
This is a follow-up to
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49650053/are-inductive-definitions-finitely-generated-in-isabelle
As I said there, Aczel writes in his paper An Introduction to Inductive D …
- 289
13
votes
2
answers
809
views
Category theorists stance on deductive systems
Lambek & Scott: Introduction to higher order categorical logic
says that
"For example, categorists may be unhappy when we treat categories as special kinds of deductive systems and logicians may …
- 289