Abstract A theory T is tight if different deductively closed extensions of T (in the same language) cannot be bi-interpretable. Many well-studied foundational theories are tight, including $\mathsf {PA}$ [39], $\mathsf {ZF}$ , $\mathsf {Z}_2$ , and $\mathsf {KM}$ [6]. In this article we extend Enayat’s investigations to subsystems of these latter two theories. We prove that restricting the Comprehension schema of $\mathsf {Z}_2$ and $\mathsf {KM}$ gives non-tight theories. Specifically, we show that $\mathsf {GB}$ and $\mathsf {ACA}_0$ each admit different bi-interpretable extensions, and the same holds for their extensions by adding $\Sigma ^1_k$ -Comprehension, for $k \ge 1$ . These results provide evidence that tightness characterizes $\mathsf {Z}_2$ and $\mathsf {KM}$ in a minimal way.

Abstract We introduce the $\Sigma _1$ -definable universal finite sequence and prove that it exhibits the universal extension property amongst the countable models of set theory under end-extension. That is, (i) the sequence is $\Sigma _1$ -definable and provably finite; (ii) the sequence is empty in transitive models; and (iii) if M is a countable model of set theory in which the sequence is s and t is any finite extension of s in this model, then there is an end-extension of M to a model in which the sequence is t. Our proof method grows out of a new infinitary-logic-free proof of the Barwise extension theorem, by which any countable model of set theory is end-extended to a model of $V=L$ or indeed any theory true in a suitable submodel of the original model. The main theorem settles the modal logic of end-extensional potentialism, showing that the potentialist validities of the models of set theory under end-extensions are exactly the assertions of S4. Finally, we introduce the end-extensional maximality principle, which asserts that every possibly necessary sentence is already true, and show that every countable model extends to a model satisfying it.

Abstract The class forcing theorem, which asserts that every class forcing notion ${\mathbb {P}}$ admits a forcing relation $\Vdash _{\mathbb {P}}$ , that is, a relation satisfying the forcing relation recursion—it follows that statements true in the corresponding forcing extensions are forced and forced statements are true—is equivalent over Gödel–Bernays set theory $\text {GBC}$ to the principle of elementary transfinite recursion $\text {ETR}_{\text {Ord}}$ for class recursions of length $\text {Ord}$ . It is also equivalent to the existence of truth predicates for the infinitary languages $\mathcal {L}_{\text {Ord},\omega }(\in ,A)$ , allowing any class parameter A; to the existence of truth predicates for the language $\mathcal {L}_{\text {Ord},\text {Ord}}(\in ,A)$ ; to the existence of $\text {Ord}$ -iterated truth predicates for first-order set theory $\mathcal {L}_{\omega ,\omega }(\in ,A)$ ; to the assertion that every separative class partial order ${\mathbb {P}}$ has a set-complete class Boolean completion; to a class-join separation principle; and to the principle of determinacy for clopen class games of rank at most $\text {Ord}+1$ . Unlike set forcing, if every class forcing notion ${\mathbb {P}}$ has a forcing relation merely for atomic formulas, then every such ${\mathbb {P}}$ has a uniform forcing relation applicable simultaneously to all formulas. Our results situate the class forcing theorem in the rich hierarchy of theories between $\text {GBC}$ and Kelley–Morse set theory $\text {KM}$ .

Abstract In this article I investigate the phenomenon of minimum and minimal models of second-order set theories, focusing on Kelley–Morse set theory KM, Gödel–Bernays set theory GB, and GB augmented with the principle of Elementary Transfinite Recursion. The main results are the following. (1) A countable model of ZFC has a minimum GBC-realization if and only if it admits a parametrically definable global well order. (2) Countable models of GBC admit minimal extensions with the same sets. (3) There is no minimum transitive model of KM. (4) There is a minimum β -model of GB+ETR. The main question left unanswered by this article is whether there is a minimum transitive model of GB+ETR.