3

The Model Existence Theorem

Although we dont have compactness or a useful Completeness Theorem, Henkinstyle arguments can still be used in some contexts to build models. In this
section we describe the general framework and give two applications.
Throughout this section we will assume that L is a countable language and
that C is an infinite set of constant symbols of L (though perhaps not all of the
constant symbols of L). The following idea due to Makkai is the key idea. It
tells us exactly what we need to do a Henkin argument.
In the following a basic term is either a constant symbol (not necessarily
from C) or a term of the form f (c1 , . . . , cn ) where f is a function symbol of L
and c1 , . . . , cn C. A closed term is a term with no variables.
Definition 3.1 A consistency property is a collection of countable sets of
L1 , -sentences with the following properties. Let
C0) and if , with and , then {};
C1) if , then 6 ;
C2) if
V , then { } ;
C3) if WX , then {} for all X;
C4) if X , then {} for some X;
C5) if v(v) , then {(c)} for all c C;
C6) if v(v) , then {(c)} for some c C;
C7) let t be a basic term and let c, d C,
a) if c = d , then {d = c} ;
b) if c = t, (t) , then {(c)} ;
c) for some b C, {b = t} .
Lemma 3.2 Let be a consistency property with , c, d, e C.
a) There is {c = c} .
b) If c = d, d = e , then {c = e} .
c) If , , then {} .
Proof a) By C7b) there is b C such that {b = c} . By C7a)
1 = {b = c, c = b} . Let (v) be the formula v = c. Since (b) and
c = b are in 1 , by C7b) = {c = c} . By C0) {c = c} .
b) Let (v) be the formula v = e. Then (d) and c = d . Thus by
C7b) {c = e} .
c) Since , by C4) either {} or {} . By C1)
the former is impossible.
The next exerecise shows that we really need only verify C1)-C7).
Exercise 3.3 Suppose 0 satisfies C1)-C7). Let
= {} {0 : 0 0 and , finite }.
Prove that is a consistency property.
11

Theorem 3.4 (Model Existence Theorem) If is a consistency property

and , there is a countable M |= .
Proof Let 0 , 1 , . . . list all F-sentences. We assume that each sentence is
listed infinitely often. Let t0 , t1 , . . . , list all basic terms.
Using the fact that is a consistency property, we build
= 0 1 . . .
such that each i and
A) if n {n }W , then n n+1 , in this case:
a) if n is X , then n+1 for some X;
b) if n is v(v), then (c) n+1 for some c C;
B) c = tn n+1 for some c C.
S
Let = n=1 n . We will build a model of .
For c, d C we say c d if c = d .
Claim is an equivalence relation
Let c C. The sentence c = c is n for some n. By Lemma 3.2, and A)
c = c n+1 . Thus c c.
If c = d , then we can find n such that c = d n and d = c is n . Then
by C7) and condition A) d = c .
If c = d, d = e , choose n such that c = d, d = e n and c = e is n .
Then by Lemmma 3.2 and A) c = e .
Let [c] denote the -class of c. Let M = {[c] : c C}. We make M into an
L-structure.
Let f be an n-ary function symbol of L and let c1 , . . . , cn C. By ii) there
is d C such that d = f (c1 , . . . , cn ) . Suppose d1 = f (c1 , . . . , cn ) is also in
, using C7b) and A) we see that d = d1 and d d1 . Also, note that if
c0 = f (c1 , . . . , cn ) , and di ci for i = 0, . . . , n then,repeatedly using C7b),
d0 = f (d1 , . . . , dn ) . Thus we can define f M : M n M by
f ([c1 ], . . . , [cn ]) = [d] d = f (c1 , . . . , cn ) .
For c1 , . . . , cn and R an n-ary relation symbol of L, we say
RM ([c1 ], . . . , [cn ]) R(c1 , . . . , cn ) .
Again, this does not depend on the choice of ci .
Claim If , then M |= . We need an annoying analysis of terms.
We prove this by induction on complexity.5
i) is s = t, where s and t are closed terms
We build a sequence of formulas s1 = t1 , . . . , sm = tm where:
s1 = s and t1 = t;
M
M
M
sM
i = si+1 and ti = ti+1 ;
5 We need to be slightly careful how we define complexity. For example, v(v) is more
W
complex than any (c) and X is more complicated than for any X.

12

 si = ti ;
sm and tm are constants in C.
If we accomplish i)-iv) then [sm ] = [tm ] and, by induction, sM = tM .
Given the formula si = ti unless si , ti C, we can find a basic subterm
6 C of one of them, say si , by B) there is c C such that c = . Obtain
si+1 from si by substituting c for and let ti+1 = ti . An easy induction shows
M
that sM
i = si+1 . By C7) and A) si+1 = ti+1 . si+1 = ti+1 .
Thus M |= t1 = t2 .
ii) is R(t1 , . . . , tn )
Exercise 3.5 Prove that M |= R(t1 , . . . , tn ). [Hint: Similar to case i).]
V
iii) is X
By C3) and A), for each X. By induction M |= for all X.
Thus M |= .
W
iv) is X
By C4) and A), there is X such that . By induction M |= .
Thus M |= .
v) is v (v)
By C5) and A), (c) for all c C. By induction M |= (c) for all
c C. Since every element of M is named by a constant, M |= .
vi) is v (v)
By A) there is c C such that (c) . By induction, M |= (c). Thus
M |= .
vii) is
By C2) and A), . This now breaks into cases depending on .
a) is s = t where s and t are closed terms
As in the proof of i) above we can find a sequence of formulas
s1 6= t1 , . . . , sm 6= tm
M
where each of the formulas is in , sM
= sM
= tM
i
i+1 , ti
i+1 , and sm , tm C.
Thus M |= .
b) is R(t1 , . . . , tm )

Exercise 3.6 Prove M |= R(t1 , . . . , tm ).

c) is
Then . My induction M |= and M |= .
V
d) isW X
Then X and for some X. By induction, M |= .
Thus M |= .
W
e) isV X
Then X and for all X. By induction M |= for all
X. Thus M |= .
f) is v (v)
13

Then v(v) and (c) for all c C. By induction, M |= (c) for

all c C. Thus M |= .
g) is v (v).
Then v(v) and (c) for some c C. But then M |= (c) and
M |= .
This completes the induction. Thus M |= .
The next exercise gives a useful extension of the Model Existence Theorem.
Exercise 3.7 [Extended Model Existence Theorem] Suppose is a consistency
property and T is a countable set of sentences such that for all and T ,
{} . Then T has a model for all . [Hint: Consider
1 = { T : }.

The Interpolation Theorem

We give two applications of the Model Existence Theorem. Both results were
first proved by Lopez-Escobar by different means. The first is the L1 , version
of Craigs Interpolation Theorem.
Theorem 3.8 Suppose 1 and 2 are L1 , -sentences with 1 |= 2 . There is
an L1 , -sentence such that 1 |= , |= 2 and every relation, function and
constant symbol occurring in occurs in both 1 and 2 .
Proof Let C be a countably infinite collection of new constant symbols. Let
Fi be a countable fragment containing i , where every relation and function
symbol and every constant symbol not in C occurs in i and every formula
contains only finitely many constants from C. Let F = F1 F2 .
Let be the collection of finite = 1 2 where i is a set of Fi -sentences
and if 1 , 2 are F-sentences such that 1 |= 1 and 2 |= 2 , then 1 2 is
satisfiable.
Claim is a consistency property.
We verify a couple of properties and leave the rest as an exercise.
V
, where = 1 2 as above. Suppose
V C3) Suppose X

.
Let

=
1 {}. We claim that 1 2 . Suppose 1 |= 1
1
1
X
and

|=

.
Then

2
2
1 |= 1 . Hence 1 2 is satisfiable. This is similar if
V

.
2
X
W
C4) Suppose X 1 . Let 1, = 1 {}. We claim that some
1, 2 . Suppose not. Then for each there are 1, , 2, F such
that 1, |= 1, , 2 |= 2, and 1, 2, is unsatisfiable. Then 1, |= 2, .
Since
_
1 |=
,
X

14

1 |=

1, .

But
2 |=

2,

and

1, |=

2,

contradicting that .
Exercise 3.9 Finish the proof that is a consistency property.
We now finish the proof of the Interpolation Theorem. Since 1 |= 2 , by
the Model Existence Theorem, {1 , 2 } 6 . Thus there are 1 and 2 F
such that 1 |= 1 , 2 |= 2 and 1 2 is unsatisfiable.
Thus
1 |= 1 , 1 |= 2 , and 2 |= 2 .
It follows that
1 |= 1 and 1 |= 2 .
We would be done except 1 may contain constants from C. Let 1 = (c),
where (v) is a F-formula with no constants from C. Then
1 |= v (v) and v (v) |= 2 .
Thus we can take
v (v)
as the interpolant.
Definition 3.10 We say that K is a P C1 , -class of L-structures, L an
expansion of L and L1 , such that K is the collection of L-reducts of
models of .
Exercise 3.11 Show that the following classes are P C1 , .
a) incomplete dense linear orders;
b) dense linear orderings where |(a, b)| = |(c, d)| for all a < b and c < d;
c) bipartite graphs;
d) free groups and free abelian groups;
e) groups with a proper subgroup of finite index;
f) ordered fields with a bounded real closed subfield;
Give other natural examples
Exercise 3.12 Suppose K1 and K2 are disjoint P C1 , -classes of L-structures.
Prove there is L1 , such that M |= for M K1 and M |= for
M K2 .

15

Exercise 3.13 For this exercise we consider only countable structures with
universe N. Suppose L is a countable language, let X be the set of all Lstructures with universe N. Topologize X so that the set of models satisfying
any atomic formula is clopen.
We say that a subset of X is invariant if it is closed under isomorphism.
a) Prove that {M : M |= } is an invariant Borel set.
b) Prove that any P C1 , -class of models is an invariant 11 -set.
c) (Scott) Prove that every invariant 11 -set is P C1 , .
d) Prove that every invariant Borel set is {M : M |= } for some L1 , .

The Undefinability of Well-Ordering

Let L = {<, . . .}
Theorem 3.14 Suppose is an L1 , -sentence and for all < 1 there is
M |= where (, <) embeds into <M . Then there is N |= where (Q, <)
embeds into <N .
Corollary 3.15 If is an L1 , -sentence and <M is well-ordered for all M |=
, then there is < 1 such that <M has order type at most for all M |= .
Proof Let L be our original language. Form L by adding new constants C and
D = {dq : q Q}. Let be of the form 0 {} {dq < dr : q < r} where
is a finite set of L1 , sentences using only finitely many constants from C D.
We write 0 (c, di1 , . . . , dim ) where i1 < . . . < im to stress the role of the extra
constants used. Then if and only if for all < 1 there is an L-structure
M where
(*)
M |= x 0 (x, b1 . . . , bm )
where there is a subset A of M well ordered by <M , b A and
b1 , b1 + b2 , . . . , bm1 + bm .
In particular, taking 0 = , we see that {} {dq < dr : q < r} . Thus,
once we prove that is a consistency property, we will have a model where <
contains a densely ordered subset.
Thus we need only show that is a consistency property. We do several of
the non-routine claims and leave the rest of the verification as an exercise.
W
C4) Suppose X . Then for each there is X and M such
that (*) holds for . There is X such that = for uncountably many
. Note that if works for it works for all < . Thus {}
C7c) Suppose t = dr and 0 uses di1 , . . . , dim where i0 < . . . < im . Suppose
is < r < is+1 . Let c be element of C not yet used. We claim that {c =
dr } .
Let < 1 . Pick > + . By (*) there is
M |= x s0 (x, b)
16

where
b1 , b1 + b2 , . . . , bm1 + bm .
Let b = bs + . Then bs + b and b + bs+1 as desired.
Exercise 3.16 Complete the proof that is a consistency property.
We give one more application of the Model Existence Theorem.
Exercise 3.17 [Omitting Types Theorem] Let F be a countable fragment and
let T be a satisfiable set of F-sentences. Suppose Xn (v1 , . . . , vmn ) is a set
of F-formulas with free variables from v1 , . . . , vn such that for all n and all
(v1 , . . . , vmn ) F such that
T {x (x)}
is satisfiable, then there is Xn such that
T {x ((x) (x))}
is satisfiable. Prove that
T {x

(x) : n = 1, 2, . . .}

Xn

is satisfiable.
Why is this called the Omitting Types Theorem?

17