Extension by definitions
In mathematical logic, more specifically in the proof theory of first-order theories, extensions by definitions formalize the introduction of new symbols by means of a definition. For example, it is common in naive set theory to introduce a symbol 
 for the set which has no member. In the formal setting of first-order theories, this can be done by adding to the theory a new constant 
 and the new axiom 
, meaning 'for all x, x is not a member of 
'. It can then be proved that doing so adds essentially nothing to the old theory, as should be expected from a definition. More precisely, the new theory is a conservative extension of the old one.
Definition of relation symbols
Let 
 be a first-order theory and 
 a formula of 
 such that 
, ..., 
 are distinct and include the variables free in 
. Form a new first-order theory 
 from 
 by adding a new 
-ary relation symbol 
, the logical axioms featuring the symbol 
 and the new axiom
,
called the defining axiom of 
.
If 
 is a formula of 
, let 
 be the formula of 
 obtained from 
 by replacing any occurrence of 
 by 
 (changing the bound variables in 
 if necessary so that the variables occurring in the 
 are not bound in 
). Then the following hold:
-  
 is provable in 
, and -  
 is a conservative extension of 
. 
The fact that 
 is a conservative extension of 
 shows that the defining axiom of 
 cannot be used to prove new theorems. The formula 
 is called a translation of 
 into 
. Semantically, the formula 
 has the same meaning as 
, but the defined symbol 
 has been eliminated.
Definition of function symbols
Let 
 be a first-order theory (with equality) and 
 a formula of 
 such that 
, 
, ..., 
 are distinct and include the variables free in 
. Assume that we can prove
in 
, i.e. for all 
, ..., 
, there exists a unique y such that 
. Form a new first-order theory 
 from 
 by adding a new 
-ary function symbol 
, the logical axioms featuring the symbol 
 and the new axiom
,
called the defining axiom of 
.
If 
 is an atomic formula of 
, define a formula 
 of 
 recursively as follows. If the new symbol 
 does not occur in 
, let 
 be 
. Otherwise, choose an occurrence of 
 in 
 such that 
 does not occur in the terms 
, and let 
 be obtained from 
 by replacing that occurrence by a new variable 
. Then since 
 occurs in 
 one less time than in 
, the formula 
 has already been defined, and we let 
 be 
(changing the bound variables in 
 if necessary so that the variables occurring in the 
 are not bound in 
). For a general formula 
, the formula 
 is formed by replacing every occurrence of an atomic subformula 
 by 
. Then the following hold:
-  
 is provable in 
, and -  
 is a conservative extension of 
. 
The formula 
 is called a translation of 
 into 
. As in the case of relation symbols, the formula 
 has the same meaning as 
, but the new symbol 
 has been eliminated.
The construction of this paragraph also works for constants, which can be viewed as 0-ary function symbols.
Extensions by definitions
A first-order theory 
 obtained from 
 by successive introductions of relation symbols and function symbols as above is called an extension by definitions of 
. Then 
 is a conservative extension of 
, and for any formula 
 of 
 we can form a formula 
 of 
, called a translation of 
 into 
, such that 
 is provable in 
. Such a formula is not unique, but any two of them can be proved to be equivalent in T.
In practice, an extension by definitions 
 of T is not distinguished from the original theory T. In fact, the formulas of 
 can be thought of as abbreviating their translations into T. The manipulation of these abbreviations as actual formulas is then justified by the fact that extensions by definitions are conservative.
Examples
-  Traditionally, the first-order set theory ZF has 
 (equality) and 
 (membership) as its only primitive relation symbols, and no function symbols. In everyday mathematics, however, many other symbols are used such as the binary relation symbol 
, the constant 
, the unary function symbol P (the power-set operation), etc. All of these symbols belong in fact to extensions by definitions of ZF. -  Let 
 be a first-order theory for groups in which the only primitive symbol is the binary product 
. In T, we can prove that there exists a unique element y such that x.y=y.x=x for every x. Therefore we can add to T a new constant e and the axiom 
,
and what we obtain is an extension by definitions 
 of T. Then in 
 we can prove that for every x, there exists a unique y such that x.y=y.x=e. Consequently, the first-order theory 
 obtained from 
 by adding a unary function symbol 
 and the axiom
is an extension by definitions of T. Usually, 
 is denoted 
.
Bibliography
- S.C. Kleene (1952), Introduction to Metamathematics, D. Van Nostrand
 - E. Mendelson (1997). Introduction to Mathematical Logic (4th ed.), Chapman & Hall.
 - J.R. Shoenfield (1967). Mathematical Logic, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company (reprinted in 2001 by AK Peters)
 


