PlanetMath (more info)
 Math for the people, by the people. Sponsor PlanetMath
Encyclopedia | Requests | Forums | Docs | Wiki | Random | RSS  
Login
create new user
name:
pass:
forget your password?
Main Menu
Owner confidence rating: Very high Entry average rating: No information on entry rating
structure (Definition)

Let $\tau$ be a signature. A $\tau$ -structure $\mathcal{A}$ comprises of a set $A$ , called the universe (or domain) of $\mathcal{A}$ , and an interpretation of the symbols of $\tau$ as follows:

If $\mathcal{A}$ is a structure, then the cardinality (or power) of $\mathcal{A}$ , $|\mathcal{A}|$ , is the cardinality of its universe $A$ .

If $\tau$ does not contain any function symbols, then a $\tau$ -structure is called a relational structure. If $\tau$ does not contain any relation symbols, then a $\tau$ -structure is called an algebraic structure.




"structure" is owned by CWoo. [ full author list (4) | owner history (3) ]
(view preamble | get metadata)

View style:

See Also: substructure, relational structure, algebraic structure, model, relational system

Also defines:  structure, interpretation
Log in to rate this entry.
(view current ratings)

Cross-references: algebraic structure, relational structure, contain, power, cardinality, subset, relation symbol, function, function symbol, element, constant symbol, signature
There are 394 references to this entry.

This is version 17 of structure, born on 2002-06-03, modified 2009-10-04.
Object id is 3017, canonical name is StructuresAndSatisfaction.
Accessed 25363 times total.

Classification:
AMS MSC03C07 (Mathematical logic and foundations :: Model theory :: Basic properties of first-order languages and structures)

Pending Errata and Addenda
None.
[ View all 4 ]
Discussion
Style: Expand: Order:
forum policy
another question by rmilson on 2002-06-03 20:03:09
In regards to your structures entry, here is a
question that has been bothering me for a good long while:

Are empty models/structures allowed?

Of course, all foralls are true in an empty model,
and all "there exists" false.

Usually the standard texts say "no empty models allowed"
and I always wondered: "how come?"

The closest I've been able to come to an explanation,
is that people seem to want to be able to deduce
that

(For all x) (Px) |- (Exists x)(Px)

and to do this, you need to forbid empty models.

This always struck me as a question of convention,
an arbitrary decision someone made long ago.

Am I missing something? What is so abhorrent about
empty models that they must be forbidden?
[ reply | up ]
nomenclature by rmilson on 2002-06-03 19:56:19
"Structures" or "models" that is the question.

I am no logician, but in every encounter I have had
with logic, this concept was named a "model".
Witness the fact that "model" theory is an established branch of
mathematical logic.

So my question is: where is your "structure" terminology
coming from. Is this a personal preference, or
is there a pattern of widespread usage to back up
your choice of words?

[ reply | up ]

Interact
post | correct | update request | add derivation | add example | add (any)