Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-01T16:54:13.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On canonicity and completions of weakly representable relation algebras

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Ian Hodkinson  and
Szabolcs Mikulás
Ian Hodkinson
Affiliation:
Department of Computing, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK, URL: www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~imh/
Szabolcs Mikulás
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science And Information Systems, Birkbeck, University of London, London, WC1E 7HX, UK, URL: www.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/~szabolcs/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We show that the variety of weakly representable relation algebras is neither canonical nor closed under Monk completions.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 245 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Andréka, H., Weakly representable but not representable relation algebras, Algebra Universalis, vol. 32 (1994), pp. 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Andréka, H. and Bredikhin, D. A., The equational theory of union-free algebras of relations, Algebra Universalis, vol. 33 (1995), pp. 516–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Andréka, H., Goldblatt, R., and Németi, I., Relativised quantification: Some canonical varieties of sequence-set algebras, this Journal, vol. 63 (1998), pp. 163–184.Google Scholar
[4]Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., and Venema, Y., Modal logic, Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Cambridge University Press, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Diestel, R., Graph theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 173, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997.Google Scholar
[6]Gehrke, M., Harding, J., and Venema, Y., MacNeille completions and canonical extensions, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 358 (2006), pp. 573–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Goldblatt, R., Metamathematics of modal logic, Reports on Mathematical Logic, vol. 6 (1976), pp. 41–77, reprinted in [9].Google Scholar
[8]Goldblatt, R., Varieties of complex algebras, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 44 (1989), pp. 173–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Goldblatt, R., Mathematics of modality, Lecture notes, vol. 43, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 1993.Google Scholar
[10]Goldblatt, R., Questions of canonicity, Trends in logic: 50years of Studia Logica (Hendricks, Vincent F. and Malinowski, Jacek, editors), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003, pp. 93–128.Google Scholar
[11]Goldblatt, R., Mathematical modal logic: A view of its evolution, Handbook of the history of logic (Gabbay, D. M. and Woods, J., editors), vol. 7, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006, pp. 1–98.Google Scholar
[12]Haiman, M., Arguesian lattices which are not linear, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 16 (1987), pp. 121–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Haiman, M., Arguesian lattices which are not type I, Algebra Universalis, vol. 28 (1991), pp. 128–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Henkin, L., Monk, J. D., and Tarski, A., Cylindric algebras part II, North-Holland, 1985.Google Scholar
[15]Hirsch, R. and Hodkinson, I., Relation algebras by games, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 147, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002.Google Scholar
[16]Hirsch, R., Hodkinson, I., and Maddux, R. D., Weak representations of relation algebras and relational bases, this Journal, vol. 76 (2011), pp. 870–882.Google Scholar
[17]Hodkinson, I., Atom structures of cylindric algebras and relation algebras, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 89 (1997), pp. 117–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Hodkinson, I. and Mikulás, Sz., Non-finite axiomatizability of reducts of algebras of relations, Algebra Universalis, vol. 43 (2000), pp. 127–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Jónsson, B., Representation of modular lattices and of relation algebras, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 92 (1959), pp. 449–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Jónsson, B. and Tarski, A., Boolean algebras with operators I, American Journal of Mathematics, vol. 73 (1951), pp. 891–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Maddux, R. D., A sequent calculus for relation algebras, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 25 (1983), pp. 73–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22]Maddux, R. D., Relation algebras, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 150, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2006.Google Scholar
[23]McKenzie, R., The representation of relation algebras, Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado at Boulder, 1966.Google Scholar
[24]Monk, J. D., Completions of boolean algebras with operators, Mathematische Nachrichten, vol. 46 (1970), pp. 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25]Pécsi, B., Weakly representable relation algebras form a variety, Algebra Universalis, vol. 60 (2009), pp. 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26]Robert, A. M., A course in p-adic analysis, Graduate Texts, Springer, New York, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[27]Wolter, F., Properties of tense logics, Mathematical Logic Quarterly, vol. 42 (1996), pp. 481–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar