[Proof Complexity] A strong alternative to weak arithmetics (fwd)

Jan Krajicek krajicek at karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Mon Jun 5 09:16:47 CEST 2017

  See Japaridze's  email below.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 07:21:02 +0000
From: Giorgi Japaridze <giorgi.japaridze at villanova.edu>
To: "ablass at umich.edu" <ablass at umich.edu>,
     "krajicek at karlin.mff.cuni.cz" <krajicek at karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
     "ugo.dal.lago at gmail.com" <ugo.dal.lago at gmail.com>,
     "domenico.zambella at unito.it" <domenico.zambella at unito.it>,
     "sacook at cs.toronto.edu" <sacook at cs.toronto.edu>,
     "Phuong.the.nguen at gmail.com" <Phuong.the.nguen at gmail.com>,
     "rparikh at gc.cuny.edu" <rparikh at gc.cuny.edu>,
     "mdetlef1 at nd.edu" <mdetlef1 at nd.edu>,
     "shalack at gmail.com" <shalack at gmail.com>,
     "vereshchagin at gmail.com" <vereshchagin at gmail.com>,
     "gurevich at microsoft.com" <gurevich at microsoft.com>,
     "Melvin.fitting at lehman.cuny.edu" <Melvin.fitting at lehman.cuny.edu>,
     "birkedal at cs.au.dk" <birkedal at cs.au.dk>,
     "berardu at dm.unipi.it" <berardu at dm.unipi.it>,
     "schwicht at math.lmu.de" <schwicht at math.lmu.de>,
     "mkikuchi at kobe-u.ac.jp" <mkikuchi at kobe-u.ac.jp>,
     "d.h.j.dejongh at uva.nl" <d.h.j.dejongh at uva.nl>,
     "sandu at mappi.helsinki.fi" <sandu at mappi.helsinki.fi>,
     "pietarin at mappi.helsinki.fi" <pietarin at mappi.helsinki.fi>,
     "pakhfn at gmail.com" <pakhfn at gmail.com>
Subject: A strong alternative to weak arithmetics

Dear colleagues,

Thought the following LMCS article might interest some of you:

https://lmcs.episciences.org/2020/pdf  (part 1)

https://lmcs.episciences.org/2042/pdf (part 2)

Was published nine months ago but I have not received any feedback yet.
 This unsolicited email is my only way to disseminate the results, as I do
not travel to conferences, nor do I have access to graduate students to
break the circle ?Idon?t care because nobody else does?.

The paper is long but, in fact, one only needs to look at the first few
pages to get a full picture, the rest is just devoted to proofs of the
claims made there. It is about an alternative to classical PA or the
traditional bounded arithmetic approach to it, claiming a number of specific
advantages and calling for either acceptance or confutation (but hopefully a
more scientific-sounding confutation than just ?How dare you!?, which I have
heard many times in the course of developing Computability Logic).     


Giorgi Japaridze

More information about the Proof-Complexity mailing list