PreprintCited by 1Advanced Algebra and LogicLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeAdvanced Database Systems and Queries

Preservation Theorems in Semiring Semantics

Open access
Brinke, Sophie, Dawar, Anuj, Grädel, Erich, Pago, Benedikt·2026·arXiv

Abstract

We study the status of preservation theorems such as the Łoś-Tarski theorem and the homomorphism preservation theorem in the context of semiring semantics. Semiring semantics has its origins in the provenance analysis of database queries. Depending on the underlying semiring, it allows us to track which atomic facts are responsible for the truth of a statement or practical information about the evaluation such as costs or confidence. The systematic development of semiring semantics for first-order logic and other logical systems raises the question to what extent classical model-theoretic results can be generalised to this setting and how such results depend on the underlying semiring. The definitions of semantic properties such as preservation under extensions, substructures, or homomorphisms naturally generalise to the setting of semiring semantics. However, the status of the corresponding preservation theorem strongly depends on the algebraic properties of the particular semirings. We prove that these preservation theorems do indeed hold for all lattice semirings (a quite large class, encompassing practically relevant semirings and in particular all min-max semirings). The proofs combine adaptations of the classical compactness and amalgamation methods with specific reduction methods for logical entailment that have been developed in semiring semantics. On the other side, variants of the existential preservation theorem fail for many other semirings, including the tropical semiring, the Viterbi semiring, the Łukasiewicz semiring, and the natural semiring. Surprisingly, the existential preservation theorem does hold for finite interpretations in a number of semirings, including all lattice semirings. Thus, the situation for these semirings is in sharp contrast to the Boolean case, where the Łoś-Tarski theorem holds in general, but not in the finite.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2605.10829

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brinke et al. show classical preservation theorems lift to K-relation semantics on every lattice semiring, a class containing the Boolean reduct B but not the natural-polynomial carriers N[X], N[X]#.

    “Brinke et al. [12] show classical preservation theorems lift to K-relation semantics on every lattice semiring, a class containing the Boolean reduct B but not the natural-polynomial carriers N [ 𝑋 ] , N [ 𝑋 ] # we adopt.”

    From TOKI: A Bitemporal Operator Algebra for Contradiction Resolution in LLM-Agent Persistent Memory (2026) · cites this paper as [12]

Authors
Brinke, S., Dawar, A., Grädel, E., & Pago, B.
Affiliations
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7160890071
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Algebra and Logic
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
Keywords
preservation theorems, tropical semiring, compactness, amalgamation, logical consequence, first-order logic, provenance analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review