We study cyclic proof systems for μPA, an extension of Peano arithmetic by positive inductive definitions that is arithmetically equivalent to the (impredicative) subsystem of second-order arithmetic Π¹₂-CA₀ by Möllefeld. The main result of this paper is that cyclic and inductive μPA have the same proof-theoretic strength. First, we translate cyclic proofs into an annotated variant based on Sprenger and Dam's systems for first-order μ-calculus, whose stronger validity condition allows for a simpler proof of soundness. We then formalise this argument within Π¹₂-CA₀, leveraging Möllerfeld's conservativity properties. To this end, we build on prior work by Curzi and Das on the reverse mathematics of the Knaster-Tarski theorem. As a byproduct of our proof methods we show that, despite the stronger validity condition, annotated and "plain" cyclic proofs for μPA prove the same theorems. This work represents a further step in the non-wellfounded proof-theoretic analysis of theories of arithmetic via impredicative fragments of second-order arithmetic, an approach initiated by Simpson's Cyclic Arithmetic, and continued by Das and Melgaard in the context of arithmetical inductive definitions.
Curzi et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: