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 reverse-math
Search options not deleted
user 70313
The general enterprise of calibrating the strength of classical mathematical theorems in terms of the axioms, typically of set existence, needed to prove them; originated in its modern form in the 1970s by H. Friedman and S. G. Simpson (see R.A. Shore, "Reverse Mathematics: The Playground of Logic", 2010).
14
votes
4
answers
3k
views
"Family Tree" of Theorems
Is anyone aware of any attempt to describe the dependencies of theorems (perhaps in mathematics generally, perhaps in some limited areas) in the form of a "family tree"? That is, each node on the tre …
- 553