Definition
An interpretation of M in N with parameters (or without parameters, respectively) is a pair where n is a natural number and is a surjective map from a subset of Nn onto M such that the -preimage (more precisely the -preimage) of every set X ⊆ Mk definable in M by a first-order formula without parameters is definable (in N) by a first-order formula with parameters (or without parameters, respectively). Since the value of n for an interpretation is often clear from context, the map itself is also called an interpretation.
To verify that the preimage of every definable (without parameters) set in N is definable in M (with or without parameters), it is sufficient to check the preimages of the following definable sets:
- the domain of N;
- the diagonal of N;
- every relation in the signature of N;
- the graph of every function in the signature of N.
In model theory the term definable often refers to definability with parameters; if this convention is used, definability without parameters is expressed by the term 0-definable. Similarly, an interpretation with parameters may be referred to as simply an interpretation, and an interpretation without parameters as a 0-interpretation.
Read more about this topic: Interpretation (model Theory)
Famous quotes containing the word definition:
“The man who knows governments most completely is he who troubles himself least about a definition which shall give their essence. Enjoying an intimate acquaintance with all their particularities in turn, he would naturally regard an abstract conception in which these were unified as a thing more misleading than enlightening.”
—William James (1842–1910)
“... if, as women, we accept a philosophy of history that asserts that women are by definition assimilated into the male universal, that we can understand our past through a male lens—if we are unaware that women even have a history—we live our lives similarly unanchored, drifting in response to a veering wind of myth and bias.”
—Adrienne Rich (b. 1929)
“Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
—Walter Pater (1839–1894)