Fractal completeness and compactness in first-order model theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31489/2026m2/181-191Keywords:
first-order logic, fractal model, elementary endomorphism, syntactic fractality, semantic fractality, fractal completeness, fractal compactness, model theoryAbstract
This article develops a formal framework for fractal structures within classical first-order model theory. The notion of fractality is reformulated in purely logical terms by replacing metric self-similarity with logical self-similarity induced by elementary endomorphisms of structures. A hierarchy of morphisms is introduced, including endomorphisms, elementary endomorphisms, and endiks, which preserve the truth of formulas in one or both directions. Based on these morphisms, fractal subsets and fractal models are defined via finite families of elementary self-maps. On the syntactic level, fractality is expressed through finite systems of T-elementary syntactic endomorphisms generating a stabilization process called the fractal corridor (a sequence of theories generated by iterated application of syntactic endomorphisms). A compatibility condition between syntactic and semantic fractality is formulated and proved. Using a Henkin-type construction, syntactic operators are lifted to semantic self-maps of a canonical model, yielding fractal completeness. A corresponding compactness theorem is also established. All constructions are carried out within standard first-order logic.
References
1 Mandelbrot, B.B. (2021). The Fractal Geometry of Nature. Echo Point Books & Media, LLC.
2 Falconer, K. (2014). Fractal Geometry: Mathematical Foundations and Applications. John Wiley & Sons.
3 Hutchinson, J. (1981). Fractals and self-similarity. Indiana University Mathematics Journal, 30(5), 713–747. http://dx.doi.org/10.1512/iumj.1981.30.30055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1512/iumj.1981.30.30055
4 Barnsley, M. F. (2014). Fractals Everywhere. 2nd ed. Boston: Academic Press.
5 Komj´athy, J., & Molontay, R., & Simon, K. (2019). Transfinite fractal dimension of trees and hierarchical scale-free graphs. Journal of Complex Networks, 7(5), 764–791. https://doi.org/10.1093/comnet/cnz005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/comnet/cnz005
6 Marker, D. (2002). Model Theory: An Introduction. New York: Springer.
7 Pillay, A. (2024). Topics in Model Theory. World Scientific. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/12455
8 Yeshkeyev, A.R. (2024). Teorii i ikh modeli: monografiia v dvukh tomakh [Theories and their models: in 2 vol.]. Karaganda: Izdatelstvo KarU [in Russian].
9 Simon, P. (2015). A Guide to NIP Theories. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415133
10 Baldwin, J., & Laskowski, M. (2017). Henkin constructions of models with size continuum. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 25(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/bsl.2018.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/bsl.2018.2
11 Yeshkeyev, A.R., & Ulbrikht, O.I., & Omarova, M.T. (2022). Number of Fragments of the Perfect Class of the Jonsson Spectrum. Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics, 43(12), 3658– 3673. https://doi.org/10.1134/S199508022215029X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S199508022215029X
12 Kaplan, I., & Ramsey, N. (2020). On Kim-independence. Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 22(5), 1423–1474. https://doi.org/10.4171/JEMS/948 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4171/jems/948
13 Aschenbrenner, M., van den Dries, L., & der Hoeven, J. (2017). Asymptotic Differential Algebra and Model Theory of Transseries. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691175423.001.0001
