Talk:Branching quantifier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] PlanetMath

The article at PM [1] is much more advanced than this one, explaining what Henking qfiers are, giving the simplest such, explaining its Skolemisation and showing how it may be used to define the Recsher and Haertig qfiers. We should incorporate the content. --- Charles Stewart^(talk) 02:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

You're right, PlanetMath is much more hardcore than us. I will update this one slightly. Nortexoid 03:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I added to the article but more could be done, especially in terms of organization. Hopefully you have a chance to tidy it up. Nortexoid 04:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I've put this on my task list, and I will, eventually, work on this article; I'm a bit distracted with things right now, and am mostly reacting on talk pages and doing little real editing right now. I guess you guessed, but I pointed to PM following your weblog story. You can just lift material from PM: its content is licensed to allow that. --- Charles Stewart(talk) 17:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

We could integrate PM's material except that the stuff on game-theoretical semantics is too loosely explained, and it isn't even required since a compositional semantics can be given for logics with the Henkin quantifier. I suppose we could mention that one "natural" semantics for these logics is game-theoretical. Nortexoid 00:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some Remarks on Infinitely Long Formulas

for example here: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/context/408123/0 and in other sources the date of henkins first text about H (Q) is 1961

The Symposium in Warsaw where the talk was given was held in 1959 and published by New York, Pergamon Press in 1961. The reference in the article is to the symposium, not the book, Infinitistic Methods, in which the article was published in 1961. Any bibliographic reference to Henkin's article would cite 1961 as the date of publication. Nortexoid 16:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Second-order translation

In this article it is said that formulas with branching quantifiers are "equivalent" with their second-order translation. Maybe it should be clarified in what context or semantics this "equivalence" has a meaning. I suppose that equivalence may be simply intended as a _definition_ of the Henkin quantifier, yet it would be better to explicitly state this matter of fact. (151.28.253.59 (talk) 19:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC))