, are finitely axiomatizable, and hence decidable.

These examples inspire the following observation. Let $\clC$ be an arbitrary class of models of the same signature, $T=\Th^L(\clC)$ the theory of $\clC$ in a model-theoretic language $L$, and $\clR$ a binary relation on $\clC$. Assuming that the satisfiability in $\clR$-images of models in $\clC$ can be expressed by an operation $f$ on sentences of $L$, i.e., for every sentence $\vf$ of $L$, and every $\stA\in\clC$,

> $\stA\mo f(\varphi)$ (“$\varphi$ is possible at $\stA$”) iff $\stB\mo\vf$ for some $\mathfrak B$ with $\stA\,\clR\,\stB$,

we can define the [*modal theory of $\clR$ in $L$*]{} as the $f$-fragment of $T$. In the general frame semantics, this modal theory is characterized by an enormous structure $
(\mathcal C,\mathcal R,\mathcal C_\vf:
\vf\text{ is a~sentence of~}L)
$ where $\clC_\vf$ is the class of models in $\clC$ validating $\vf$. We can also define the [*modal Lindenbaum algebra of $\Th^L(\clC)$ and $\clR$*]{}, i.e., the Boolean algebra of sentences of $L$ modulo the equivalence on $\clC$, endowed with the modal operator induced by $f$.[^2] In Section \[sec:defs\], we provide formal definitions and basic semantic tools for such modal theories. In particular, the algebra of $\Th^L(\clC)$ and $\clR$ can be represented as the modal algebra of a general frame consisting of complete theories $\{\Th^L(\stA):\stA\in\clC\}$. We use this in Section \[sec:sub\], where we calculate modal logics of the submodel relation $\supmod$; to express the satisfiability in submodels, we use second-order language.

In Section \[sec:upanddown\],[^3] we discuss the situation when the $\clR$-satisfiability is not expressible in a 
, are finitely axiomatizable, and hence decidable. 

 These examples inspire the following observation. lease $ \clC$ be an arbitrary course of models of the same touch, $ T=\Th^L(\clC)$ the hypothesis of $ \clC$ in a   model - theoretic language   $ L$, and $ \clR$ a   binary sexual intercourse on   $ \clC$. Assuming that the satisfiability in $ \clR$-images of models in $ \clC$ can be express by an operation $ f$ on sentences of   $ L$, i.e., for every prison term $ \vf$ of   $ L$, and every $ \stA\in\clC$, 

 > $ \stA\mo f(\varphi)$ (“ $ \varphi$   is possible at   $ \stA$ ”) iff $ \stB\mo\vf$ for some $ \mathfrak B$ with $ \stA\,\clR\,\stB$, 

 we can define the [ * modal hypothesis of $ \clR$ in   $ L$ * ] { } as the $ f$-fragment of   $ T$. In the general frame semantics, this modal theory is characterized by an enormous structure $ 
 (\mathcal C,\mathcal R,\mathcal C_\vf: 
 \vf\text { is a ~ sentence of~}L) 
 $ where $ \clC_\vf$   is the class of models in   $ \clC$ validate   $ \vf$. We can also define the [ * modal Lindenbaum algebra of $ \Th^L(\clC)$ and   $ \clR$ * ] { }, i.e., the Boolean algebra of sentences of $ L$ modulo the comparison on   $ \clC$, endowed with the modal operator induced by   $ f$.[^2 ] In Section   \[sec: defs\ ], we provide conventional definitions and basic semantic tools for such modal theories. In particular, the algebra of $ \Th^L(\clC)$ and $ \clR$ can be represented as the modal algebra of a   cosmopolitan frame consisting of complete theories $ \{\Th^L(\stA):\stA\in\clC\}$. We use this in Section   \[sec: sub\ ], where we calculate modal logic of the submodel sexual intercourse   $ \supmod$; to express the satisfiability in submodels, we use second - order language. 

 In Section \[sec: upanddown\],[^3 ] we discuss the situation when the $ \clR$-satisfiability is not expressible in a
, arf finitely axiomatizable, and hence decibqble.

Thxse exajples inrpire the following observatmon. Oet $\coC$ be an arbitrary clars of modvls of thw sanw signaturx, $T=\Th^L(\clG)$ the bheorv if $\clC$ in a modgl-theoretic nanguage $L$, and $\wlF$ c binary relation on $\clC$. Assuming that the sayidfiability in $\slR$-ikwges of models in $\clC$ can be expressed by an mperation $f$ om sentences of $L$, i.e., for evegy sfntence $\vf$ of $L$, and every $\stA\ib\clC$,

> $\wtA\mo f(\varphk)$ (“$\varphi$ is possible at $\atA$”) iff $\stB\mo\vf$ for some $\mathfrxk B$ cith $\stA\,\clR\,\wtV$,

we wan define vhe [*moqal theory on $\clR$ it $L$*]{} as tne $f$-fragment on $T$. In thw general frame semanvics, this modal theoty is chardccerized by an enormouw wtrucjure $
(\kathzql Z,\mauhcel D,\mathcwl R_\vf:
\vf\text{ ia a~sentence of~}L)
$ where $\clC_\vf$ is uhe bkass of modems in $\cjC$ validating $\vf$. We can also define the [*mogal Lindenbaum algebra of $\Rh^L(\clC)$ and $\clR$*]{}, i.e., the Hoolean ajgebra of sentences of $L$ modulo the equivalence ot $\clC$, xnaowtd with rhf modal operator induced by $f$.[^2] In Section \[sec:deff\], wt pgovide formal deflnitions and basic sfmsgtic tools fot such modzl theories. In parhicular, the qlgebra os $\Th^K(\clC)$ and $\clR$ can be represebted as the iidal algebra of a gzneral frame conxistimg of complete theories $\{\Th^L(\atA):\stA\in\clC\}$. We use tgks in Section \[sec:rub\], wvere we calculate modal lodics of tie suymodel rdlatoon $\supiod$; to expgess bve satisfiability ln suymodens, we use decond-order language.

In Section \[sec:upanddown\],[^3] wg dhsclss the sntuatipn when the $\cjR$-satisfiabilijy is not exprdssible in a 
, are finitely axiomatizable, and hence decidable. inspire following observation. $\clC$ be an the signature, $T=\Th^L(\clC)$ the of $\clC$ in model-theoretic language $L$, and $\clR$ a relation on $\clC$. Assuming that the satisfiability in $\clR$-images of models in $\clC$ be expressed by an operation $f$ on sentences of $L$, i.e., for every $\vf$ $L$, every > $\stA\mo f(\varphi)$ (“$\varphi$ is possible at $\stA$”) iff $\stB\mo\vf$ for some $\mathfrak B$ with $\stA\,\clR\,\stB$, can define the [*modal theory of $\clR$ in as the $f$-fragment of In the general frame semantics, modal is characterized an structure (\mathcal C,\mathcal R,\mathcal \vf\text{ is a~sentence of~}L) $ where $\clC_\vf$ is the class of models in $\clC$ validating $\vf$. We also define Lindenbaum algebra $\Th^L(\clC)$ $\clR$*]{}, the Boolean algebra of $L$ modulo the equivalence on the modal operator induced by $f$.[^2] In Section we provide definitions and basic semantic tools for modal theories. In particular, the algebra of $\Th^L(\clC)$ $\clR$ can be represented as the modal algebra of a general frame consisting of complete We use this in \[sec:sub\], where we modal of submodel $\supmod$; to the satisfiability in submodels, we use second-order language. In Section \[sec:upanddown\],[^3] discuss the situation when the $\clR$-satisfiability is not expressible in
, are finitely axiomatizable, aNd hence decIdablE.

ThEse ExAmplEs inSpire the followINg obServation. Let $\clC$ be an arbItrarY cLAss oF MoDels oF the samE SiGNAtuRe, $t=\TH^L(\cLC)$ THe TheorY of $\ClC$ in a mOdel-theoreTic LaNguage $L$, and $\clr$ A bInary relatIon On $\clC$. AssuminG thAt the sAtIsfIAbiliTy iN $\clR$-iMages oF Models In $\clC$ can bE eXPresseD By an opeRATiOn $f$ oN sentences of $L$, i.e., foR EvERy sentence $\vf$ of $l$, and evErY $\Sta\IN\clc$,

> $\sta\mo f(\varphi)$ (“$\VaRphi$ iS PossiblE At $\STa$”) Iff $\STB\mo\vf$ for some $\Mathfrak B$ wiTH $\sta\,\clR\,\stb$,

wE caN Define The [*moDaL TheOry of $\clR$ in $L$*]{} As thE $f$-fragmenT of $T$. In THe generAL frame sEmantiCs, tHis ModaL ThEoRy iS cHAraCTeRizED by An enormoUs StRuctuRe $
(\maTHCAL C,\maThcAl R,\mAthcaL C_\vf:
\vf\text{ is a~SenTencE Of~}L)
$ Where $\ClC_\vf$ Is thE cLass oF modelS in $\clc$ vAlidating $\vf$. We caN alsO define thE [*moDaL LiNdEnbauM AlgebrA of $\th^L(\ClC)$ and $\cLR$*]{}, i.e., the bOolEaN ALGeBra of sentences of $L$ mOdULO tHe equivaLence oN $\Clc$, eNDowed witH tHe mOdal OPEratoR indUCeD by $f$.[^2] In SeCtion \[sEC:dEfS\], we provIdE formaL dEfiNitIons aND basIc semaNtic toolS for sUCh modal theorieS. in particular, tHE aLGEbRA of $\TH^L(\cLC)$ and $\clR$ can Be rePReseNted AS tHe mODal alGebra Of A GeNEral frame consisting Of CompleTe theOries $\{\Th^L(\stA):\sta\in\clC\}$. We usE THIs in SectIon \[sEC:sUB\], where we calculAte moDal logics oF The submoDel reLation $\suPmod$; to expRESs the satIsfIabIliTy iN SUbModels, we use seCONd-orDeR languaGe.

IN SectioN \[seC:upAndDowN\],[^3] wE discuss tHe situatIoN wHeN tHe $\cLR$-satISfiabiliTy Is nOt ExpRessiBLe in a 
, are finitely axiomatizab le, and he nce d eci dab le .

T hese  examples insp i re t he following observati on. L et $\cl C $be an  arbitr a ry c las sof  mo de l sof th e s ame sig nature, $T =\T h^ L(\clC)$ the th eory of $\ clC $ in a model -th eoreti clan g uage$L$ , and  $\clR $  a bin ary relat io n  on $\ c lC$. As s u mi ng t hat the satisfiab i li t y in $\clR$-im ages o fm od e l s i n $ \clC$ canbe  expr e ssed by an o p era t ion $f$ on se ntences of$ L$,  i.e.,  f ore very s enten ce $\v f$ of $L$,andevery $\s tA\in\ c lC$,

> $\stA\m o f(\v arp hi) $ (“ $ \v ar phi $i s p o ss ibl e  at  $\stA$” )if f $\s tB\m o \ v f $ fo r s ome$\mat hfrak B$ with  $\ stA\ , \cl R\,\s tB$,
weca n def ine th e [*m od al theory of $\ clR$  in $L$*] {}as  th e$f$-f r agment  of  $T $. In t he gene r alfr a m e  s emantics, this mod al t he ory is c haract e ri ze d  by an e no rmo us s t r uctur e $( \m athcal C ,\math c al  R ,\mathc al  C_\vf :\vf \te xt{ i s  a~s entenc e of~}L) 
$ wh e re $\clC_\vf$i s the class o f  m o d el s  in$\c lC$ validat ing$ \vf$ . We ca n a l so de fineth e  [ * modal Lindenbaum al ge bra of  $\Th ^L(\clC)$ and  $\clR$*]{ } , i.e., th e Bo o le a n algebra of s enten ces of $L$ modulo t he eq uivalenc e on $\cl C $ , endowe d w ith  th e m o d al  operator ind u c ed b y$f$.[^2 ] I n Secti on\[s ec: def s\ ], we pro vide for ma lde fi nit ionsa nd basic  s ema nt ictools for su ch mo dalth eo r ies . In pa r ti c u lar,  t he  alg ebr aof $\ Th^L ( \cl C)$ and  $\clR$ c anb e re pr es ented a s the modal a lg ebra of age ner al fra m e  consist ing of complete theorie s  $\{\Th ^L( \stA) :\st A\in\clC\ }$.  We us e t h is inSectio n \[s ec :su b \ ], wh e r eweca lculate mo d a l l ogics  o f th e submo del relation $\sup m od$ ; to expressthe  sat i s fi abi l it y  in  s u bmo d e ls, we use seco nd-order l an g ua ge.

In Se c tio n\[sec:u panddow n\],[ ^ 3] we d iscuss th e situati on  whe n the  $\clR$-sa tisfiabi lity is n o t exp r es sible  in  a 
, are_finitely axiomatizable,_and hence decidable.

These examples_inspire the_following_observation. Let_$\clC$_be an arbitrary_class of models_of the same signature,_$T=\Th^L(\clC)$ the theory_of_$\clC$ in a model-theoretic language $L$, and $\clR$ a binary relation on $\clC$. Assuming that the satisfiability in_$\clR$-images_of models_in_$\clC$_can be expressed by an_operation $f$ on sentences of $L$,_i.e., for_every sentence $\vf$ of $L$, and every $\stA\in\clC$,

> $\stA\mo_f(\varphi)$_(“$\varphi$ is possible at $\stA$”)_iff $\stB\mo\vf$ for some $\mathfrak B$ with $\stA\,\clR\,\stB$,

we can_define the [*modal theory of $\clR$_in $L$*]{} as the_$f$-fragment_of $T$._In the general frame_semantics, this modal theory is characterized_by an enormous structure $
(\mathcal C,\mathcal_R,\mathcal C_\vf:
\vf\text{ is a~sentence of~}L)
$ where $\clC_\vf$ is_the class of models in $\clC$ validating $\vf$._We can also define the_[*modal Lindenbaum_algebra of $\Th^L(\clC)$ and $\clR$*]{}, i.e.,_the Boolean algebra_of sentences_of $L$ modulo_the equivalence on $\clC$, endowed with the_modal operator induced_by $f$.[^2] In Section \[sec:defs\], we provide formal_definitions_and basic semantic_tools_for_such modal_theories. In particular,_the_algebra of_$\Th^L(\clC)$_and $\clR$ can be represented as_the_modal algebra of a general frame consisting of_complete theories $\{\Th^L(\stA):\stA\in\clC\}$. We_use_this in Section \[sec:sub\], where_we calculate modal logics of_the submodel relation $\supmod$; to express the_satisfiability in_submodels, we_use second-order language.

In Section \[sec:upanddown\],[^3] we discuss the situation when the_$\clR$-satisfiability is not expressible in a 