English

Short Proofs for Slow Consistency

Logic 2020-03-09 v2

Abstract

Let Con(T) ⁣ ⁣x\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf T)\!\restriction\!x denote the finite consistency statement "there are no proofs of contradiction in T\mathbf T with x\leq x symbols". For a large class of natural theories T\mathbf T, Pudl\'ak has shown that the lengths of the shortest proofs of Con(T) ⁣ ⁣n\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf T)\!\restriction\!n in the theory T\mathbf T itself are bounded by a polynomial in nn. At the same time he conjectures that T\mathbf T does not have polynomial proofs of the finite consistency statements Con(T+Con(T)) ⁣ ⁣n\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf T+\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf T))\!\restriction\!n. In contrast we show that Peano arithmetic (PA\mathbf{PA}) has polynomial proofs of Con(PA+Con(PA)) ⁣ ⁣n\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{PA}+\operatorname{Con}^*(\mathbf{PA}))\!\restriction\!n, where Con(PA)\operatorname{Con}^*(\mathbf{PA}) is the slow consistency statement for Peano arithmetic, introduced by S.-D. Friedman, Rathjen and Weiermann. We also obtain a new proof of the result that the usual consistency statement Con(PA)\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{PA}) is equivalent to ε0\varepsilon_0 iterations of slow consistency. Our argument is proof-theoretic, while previous investigations of slow consistency relied on non-standard models of arithmetic.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1712.03251,
  title  = {Short Proofs for Slow Consistency},
  author = {Anton Freund and Fedor Pakhomov},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.03251},
  year   = {2020}
}
R2 v1 2026-06-22T23:12:44.991Z