BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:researchseminars.org
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
X-WR-CALNAME:researchseminars.org
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Jason Parker (Brandon)
DTSTART:20210430T150000Z
DTEND:20210430T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/1
DESCRIPTION:Title: <a href="https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/Logic
 Supergroup/1/">Isotropy Groups of Quasi-Equational Theories</a>\nby Jason 
 Parker (Brandon) as part of Logic Supergroup\n\n\nAbstract\nIn [2]\, my Ph
 D supervisors (Pieter Hofstra and Philip Scott) and I studied the new topo
 s-theoretic phenomenon of isotropy (as introduced in [1]) in the context o
 f single-sorted algebraic theories\, and we gave a logical/syntactic chara
 cterization of the\nisotropy group of any such theory\, thereby showing th
 at it encodes a notion of inner automorphism or conjugation for the theory
 . In the present talk\, I will summarize the results of my recent PhD thes
 is\, in which I build on this earlier work by studying the isotropy groups
  of (multi-sorted) quasi-equational theories (also known as essentially al
 gebraic\, cartesian\, or finite limit theories). In particular\, I will sh
 ow how to give a logical/syntactic characterization of the isotropy group 
 of any such theory\, and that it encodes a notion of inner automorphism or
  conjugation for the theory. I will also describe how I have used this cha
 racterization to exactly characterize the ‘inner automorphisms’ for se
 veral different examples of quasi-equational theories\, most notably the t
 heory of strict monoidal categories and the theory of presheaves valued in
  a category of models. In particular\, the latter example provides a chara
 cterization of the (covariant) isotropy group of a category of set-valued 
 presheaves\, which had been an open question in the theory of categorical 
 isotropy. \n\n[1] J. Funk\, P. Hofstra\, B. Steinberg. Isotropy and crosse
 d toposes. Theory and Applications of Categories 26\, 660-709\, 2012.\n\n[
 2] P. Hofstra\, J. Parker\, P.J. Scott. Isotropy of algebraic theories. El
 ectronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 341\, 201-217\, 2018.\n\nht
 tps://sites.google.com/view/logicsupergroup/\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/1/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Romina Padro (CUNY)
DTSTART:20210507T150000Z
DTEND:20210507T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/2
DESCRIPTION:by Romina Padro (CUNY) as part of Logic Supergroup\n\nAbstract
 : TBA\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/2/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Francesca Boccuni & Luca Zanetti (Vita-Salute San Raffaele & IUSS 
 Pavia)
DTSTART:20210514T150000Z
DTEND:20210514T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/3
DESCRIPTION:Title: <a href="https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/Logic
 Supergroup/3/">How to Hamlet a Caesar</a>\nby Francesca Boccuni & Luca Zan
 etti (Vita-Salute San Raffaele & IUSS Pavia) as part of Logic Supergroup\n
 \n\nAbstract\nNeologicism aims at providing a foundation for arithmetic on
  the basis of so-called Hume's Principle (HP)\, which states that the numb
 er of the Fs is identical with the number of the Gs iff there is one-to-on
 e correspondence between the concepts F and G. Philosophically\, Neologici
 sm amounts to three main claims: (1) HP is analytic\; (2) HP is&nbsp\;<i>a
  priori</i>\; (3) HP captures the nature of cardinal numbers. Nevertheless
 \, Neologicism is faced with the so-called&nbsp\;<i>Caesar problem</i>: th
 ough HP provides an implicit definition of the concept&nbsp\;<i>Cardinal N
 umber</i>\, which arguably might be known a priori\, HP does not determine
  the truth-value of mixed identity statements such as "Caesar=4". Neologic
 ists tackle the Caesar problem by claiming that the applicability conditio
 ns of the concept&nbsp\;<i>Cardinal Number</i>&nbsp\;can be obtained from 
 the identity conditions determined by HP\, so that the truth of mixed iden
 tity statements as "Caesar=4" can be determined in the negative. In this t
 alk\, we will argue that the Neologicist solution to the Caesar problem gi
 ves rise to what we call the&nbsp\;<i>Caesar Problem problem</i>: if the C
 aesar problem is indeed solved as Neologicists claim\, then (1)-(3) cannot
  be jointly argued for.&nbsp\;We will consider some ways in which Neologic
 ists can try to solve the Caesar Problem problem\, and we will argue that 
 none of these solutions are favourable to them. Finally\, we will investig
 ate the consequences of the Caesar Problem problem for Neologicism.&nbsp\;
 </p>\n\nhttps://sites.google.com/view/logicsupergroup/\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/3/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:John Baldwin (UIC)
DTSTART:20210521T150000Z
DTEND:20210521T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/4
DESCRIPTION:by John Baldwin (UIC) as part of Logic Supergroup\n\nAbstract:
  TBA\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/4/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Bruno Da Re (Conicet/UBA)
DTSTART:20210528T150000Z
DTEND:20210528T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/5
DESCRIPTION:by Bruno Da Re (Conicet/UBA) as part of Logic Supergroup\n\nAb
 stract: TBA\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/5/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Cristóbal Rojas (Andrés Bello)
DTSTART:20210611T150000Z
DTEND:20210611T170000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/6
DESCRIPTION:by Cristóbal Rojas (Andrés Bello) as part of Logic Supergrou
 p\n\nAbstract: TBA\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/6/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Verónica Becher (Universidad de Buenos Aires)
DTSTART:20210618T010000Z
DTEND:20210618T030000Z
DTSTAMP:20260404T111102Z
UID:LogicSupergroup/7
DESCRIPTION:Title: <a href="https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/Logic
 Supergroup/7/">Random!</a>\nby Verónica Becher (Universidad de Buenos Air
 es) as part of Logic Supergroup\n\n\nAbstract\nEveryone has an intuitive i
 dea about what randomness is\, often associated with "gambling" or "luck".
  Is there a mathematical definition of randomness? Are there degrees of ra
 ndomness? Can we give examples of randomness? Can a computer produce a seq
 uence that is truly random? What is the relation between randomness\, logi
 c\, language and information? I will talk about these questions and their 
 answers.\n
LOCATION:https://stable.researchseminars.org/talk/LogicSupergroup/7/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
