1.3. Form of theories: notions, objects and meta-objects

The variability of the model

Each theory describes its model as a fixed system. But from the larger viewpoint of model theory, this is a mere «choice» of one possible model (interpretation) in a (usually infinite) range of other existing, equally legitimate models of the same theory. Now this fixation of the model, like the fixation of any variable, is just the simple act of picking any possibility, ignoring any issue of how to specify an example in this range. Actually these «choice» and «existence» of models can be quite abstract. In details, the proof of the Completeness theorem will effectively «specify» a model of any consistent theory for the general case, but this definition will not be very explicit, due to its use of infinity. Regardless this difficulty, the attitude of implicitly fixing a model when formally studying any mathematical theory, remains the normal way of interpreting it (except somehow for set theory as explained in 2.A).

Notions and objects

Each theory has its own list of notions (usually designated by common names), formally serving as the kinds of variables it can use ; each model interprets each notion as a set that is the common range of all variables of this kind. For example, Euclidean geometry has the notions of «point», «straight line», «circle» and more, and is usually expressed using a different style of variable symbol for each. The objects of a theory in a model, are all possible values of its variables of all kinds (the elements of all its notions) in this model.

One-model theory

Any discussion on several theories T and systems M that may be models of those T, takes place in model theory, with its notions of «theory» and «system» that are the respective kinds of the variables T and M. But when focusing on one theory with a fixed model, the variables T and M now fixed disappear from the list of variables. Their kinds, the notions of theory and model, disappear from the notions list too. This reduces the framework, from some model theory, to that of a one-model theory.
A model of a one-model theory, is a system [T,M] which combines a theory T with a model M of T.

The diversity of logical frameworks

The role of a logical framework, as a precise version of (one-)model theory with its proof theory, is to describe : Here are those we shall see, roughly ordered from the poorest to the most expressive (though the order depends on the ways to relate them): We shall first describe the main two of them in parallel. First-order logic is the most common version of model theory, describing first-order theories we shall also call generic theories. Set theory, which can encompass all other theories, can also encompass logical frameworks and thus serve itself as the ultimate logical framework as will be explained in 1.D.
Most frameworks manage notions as types (usually in finite number for each theory) classifying both variables and objects. Notions are called types if each object belongs to only one of them, which is then also called the type of the variables that can name it. For example, an object of Euclidean geometry may be either a point or a straight line, but the same object cannot be both a point and a straight line. But set theory will need more notions beyond types: classes, which will be introduced in 1.7.

Examples of notions from various theories

Theory Kinds of objects (notions)
Generic theories Urelements classified by types to play different roles
Set theory Elements, sets, functions, operations, relations, tuples...
Model theory Theories, systems and their components (listed below)
 One-model theory    Objects, symbols, types or other notions, Booleans,
structures (operators, predicates), expressions (terms, formulas)...
Arithmetic Natural numbers
Linear Algebra Vectors, scalars...
Geometry Points, straight lines, circles...


The notions of a one-model theory (1MT), normally interpreted in [T,M], classify the components of T («type», «symbol», «formula»...), and those of M («object», and tools to interpret components and expressions of T there). But the same notions (which may belong to another logical framework) can be interpreted in [1MT, [T,M]], by putting the prefix meta- on them.

By its notion of «object», each one-model theory distinguishes the objects of T in M from the rest of its own objects in [T,M], which are the meta-objects. The above rule of use of the meta prefix would let every object be a meta-object; but we will make a vocabulary exception by only calling meta-object those which are not objects: symbols, types or other notions, Booleans, structures, expressions...

Set theory only knows the ranges of some of its own variables, seen as objects (sets). But, seen by one-model theory, every variable of a theory has a range among notions, which are meta-objects only.

Components of theories

In a given logical framework, the content of a theory consists in 3 lists of components of the following kinds, where those of each of the latter two kinds are finite systems using those of the previous kind.

Set-theoretical interpretations

Any generic theory can be interpreted (inserted, translated) in set theory by converting its components into components of set theory. This is the usual view of ordinary mathematics, seeing many systems as «sets with relations or operations such that...», with possible connections between these systems. Let us introduce both the generic interpretations applicable to any generic theory, and other ones usually preferred for some specific theories.

Any interpretation converts each abstract type into a symbol (name) designating a set called interpreted type (serving as the range of variables of that type, whose use is otherwise left intact). This symbol is usually a fixed variable in the generic case, but can be accepted as constant symbol of set theory in special cases such as numbers systems (ℕ, ℝ...).
In generic interpretations, all objects (elements of interpreted types) are urelements, but other kinds of interpretations called standard by convention for specific theories may do otherwise. For example, standard interpretations of geometry represent points by urelements, but represent straight lines by sets of points.

Generic interpretations will also convert structure symbols into fixed variables (while standard ones may define them using the language of set theory). Any choice of fixed values of all types and structure symbols, defines a choice of system. When the language is seen as a set (in particular if it is finite) which is usually the case, models are themselves objects of set theory, owing their multiplicity to the variability of types and structure symbols. This integrates all needed theories into the same set theory, while gathering representatives of all their considered models inside a common model of set theory. This is why models of set theory are called universes.

When adopting set theory as our conceptual framework, this concept of "interpretation" becomes synonymous with the choice (designation) of a model.

Set theory and Foundations of mathematics
1. First foundations of mathematics
1.1. Introduction to the foundations of mathematics
1.2. Variables, sets, functions and operations
1.3. Form of theories: notions, objects, meta-objects
1.4. Structures of mathematical systems
1.5. Expressions and definable structures
1.6. Logical connectives
1.7. Classes in set theory
1.8. Binders in set theory
1.9. Axioms and proofs
1.10. Quantifiers
1.11. Second-order quantifiers
Time in model theory
Truth undefinability
Introduction to incompleteness
Set theory as unified framework
2. Set theory - 3. Algebra - 4. Arithmetic - 5. Second-order foundations
Other languages:
FR : 1.3. Forme des théories: notions, objets, méta-objets