 $\psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$. Similarly, $\psi_2(\theta_2)=\psi(\theta_2).$ So, it readily follows that $(\psi(\theta_1))_{k_0}(Id)=1$ and $(\psi(\theta_2))_{k_0}(Id)=0$. This contradicts that $\psi(\theta_1)\leq \psi(\theta_2),$ and we are done.

When $G$ consists only of finite transformations and $v\sim \rho(p)$ is infinite, then ${\mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ has the interpolation property.

In the next example, we show that the condition $\Gamma_0\subseteq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be omitted. The example is an an algebraic version of theorem 4.31, p.121 in [@b], but modified appropriately to deal with infinitary languages.

\[counter\]

Let $G$ be a strongly rich semigroup on $\omega$. Let $\Lambda_{\omega}$ be a language with three predicate symbols each of arity $\omega$; this is a typless logic abstracting away from rank of atomic formulas, so that we might as well forget about the variables, since we allow them only in their natural order. The real rank of such relation symbols will be recovered from the semantics. Let $\bold M=(\N, \leq, \D_i)_{i\in \omega}$ be the Kripke frame with $D_i=\N$ for every $i$, and let $\N=\bigcup_{n\in \omega} B_n$, where $B_n$ is a sequence of pairwise disjoint infinite sets. We define the relation $\models$ on atomic formulas. Let $m\in \N$. If $m=2n+1$, and $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$ then $m\models p_0[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$, $m\models p_1[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$ and $m\models p_3[s]$.

If $m=2n$, and $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$ then $m\models p_0[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq n
$ \psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$. Similarly, $ \psi_2(\theta_2)=\psi(\theta_2).$ So, it readily follows that $ (\psi(\theta_1))_{k_0}(Id)=1 $ and $ (\psi(\theta_2))_{k_0}(Id)=0$. This contradicts that $ \psi(\theta_1)\leq \psi(\theta_2),$ and we are do. 

 When $ G$ consist only of finite transformations and $ v\sim \rho(p)$ is infinite, then $ { \mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ have the interpolation property. 

 In the following example, we show that the circumstance $ \Gamma_0\subseteq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be exclude. The example is an an algebraic interpretation of theorem 4.31, p.121 in [ @b ], but modified appropriately to deal with infinitary linguistic process. 

 \[counter\ ] 

 Let $ G$ be a powerfully rich semigroup on $ \omega$. lease $ \Lambda_{\omega}$ be a speech with three predicate symbols each of arity $ \omega$; this is a typless logic abstracting away from membership of atomic formulas, so that we might as well forget about the variable, since we allow them only in their natural order. The real membership of such relation symbols will be recovered from the semantics. Let $ \bold M=(\N, \leq, \D_i)_{i\in \omega}$ be the Kripke frame with $ D_i=\N$ for every $ i$, and let $ \N=\bigcup_{n\in \omega } B_n$, where $ B_n$ is a sequence of pairwise disjoint infinite sets. We define the relation $ \models$ on atomic formulas. Let $ m\in \N$. If $ m=2n+1 $, and $ s\in { } ^{\omega}\N,$ then $ m\models p_0[s]$ if $ s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$, $ m\models p_1[s]$ if $ s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$ and $ m\models p_3[s]$. 

 If $ m=2n$, and $ s\in { } ^{\omega}\N,$ then $ m\models p_0[s]$ if $ s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq n
 $\psl_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$. Similarly, $\psi_2(\theta_2)=\psi(\theja_2).$ So, it readimy follods that $(\psi(\theta_1))_{k_0}(Id)=1$ and $(\psi(\tieta_2))_{j_0}(Id)=0$. Tyis contradicts that $\pri(\theta_1)\lee \psi(\thera_2),$ aid we are done.

Whxh $G$ consists kkly oy hinite transforkations ang $v\sim \rho(p)$ is ivfnnite, then ${\mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ has the inter[olatiom oroperty.

In the nexu evampmv, ce show that the condition $\Gammz_0\subsettq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be omitted. The example is an an wlgebraic version lf theorem 4.31, p.121 ig [@b], but modifked appropgnately to dgal with infinitary languages.

\[couvter\]

Lzt $G$ be a sjxingpi rich semigcoup og $\omega$. Let $\Lambda_{\omaga}$ be s language witm thrxe peedicate symbols each of arity $\omega$; thys is a tfpmess logic abstraxtung afay xrom eany or etojic fogmumas, so thaf we might qs well forget abouu trv variables, sjnce wq wllow them only in their natural order. Uhe rsal rank of such relatiin symbols will be refovered fwom the semantics. Let $\bold M=(\N, \leq, \D_i)_{i\in \omega}$ be dhe Kcioke fvame qihh $D_i=\N$ for every $i$, and let $\N=\bigcup_{n\in \omega} B_g$, wnege $B_n$ is a sequenge of pairwise diskolny infinite setr. We dzrihe the relation $\mofels$ on atomuc formulws. Lrt $m\in \N$. If $m=2n+1$, and $s\in {}^{\omegq}\N,$ then $m\modvls p_0[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\lzq 2n+1}B_i$, $m\modeus p_1[x]$ if $x_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$ and $o\modsls p_3[s]$.

If $m=2n$, and $s\in {}^{\koega}\N,$ then $m\modeus i_0[s]$ ix $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq n
$\psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$. Similarly, $\psi_2(\theta_2)=\psi(\theta_2).$ So, it readily follows and This contradicts $\psi(\theta_1)\leq \psi(\theta_2),$ and consists of finite transformations $v\sim \rho(p)$ is then ${\mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ has the interpolation In the next example, we show that the condition $\Gamma_0\subseteq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be The example is an an algebraic version of theorem 4.31, p.121 in [@b], modified to with languages. \[counter\] Let $G$ be a strongly rich semigroup on $\omega$. Let $\Lambda_{\omega}$ be a language three predicate symbols each of arity $\omega$; this a typless logic abstracting from rank of atomic formulas, that might as forget the since we allow only in their natural order. The real rank of such relation symbols will be recovered from the Let $\bold \D_i)_{i\in \omega}$ the frame $D_i=\N$ for every let $\N=\bigcup_{n\in \omega} B_n$, where $B_n$ of pairwise disjoint infinite sets. We define the $\models$ on formulas. Let $m\in \N$. If $m=2n+1$, $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$ then $m\models p_0[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq $m\models p_1[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$ and $m\models p_3[s]$. If $m=2n$, and $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$ then if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq n
 $\psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$. Similarly, $\Psi_2(\theta_2)=\psI(\thetA_2).$ So, It rEaDily FollOws that $(\psi(\thetA_1))_{K_0}(Id)=1$ aNd $(\psi(\theta_2))_{k_0}(Id)=0$. This contrAdictS tHAt $\psI(\ThEta_1)\leQ \psi(\theTA_2),$ aND We aRe DoNe.

WHeN $g$ cOnsisTs oNly of fiNite transfOrmAtIons and $v\sim \rHO(p)$ Is infinite, TheN ${\mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ hAs tHe inteRpOlaTIon prOpeRty.

In The nexT ExamplE, we show thAt THe condITion $\GamMA_0\SuBsetEq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be omITtED. The example is aN an algEbRAiC VErsIon Of theorem 4.31, p.121 In [@B], but mODified aPPrOPRIatELy to deal with iNfinitary laNGuaGes.

\[couNtEr\]

LET $G$ be a sTrongLy RIch Semigroup on $\OmegA$. Let $\LambdA_{\omega}$ BE a languAGe with tHree prEdiCatE symBOlS eAch Of ARitY $\OmEga$; THis Is a typleSs LoGic abStraCTING awaY frOm raNk of aTomic formulas, So tHat wE MigHt as wEll foRget AbOut thE variaBles, sInCe we allow them onLy in Their natuRal OrDer. thE real RAnk of sUch RelAtion syMbols wiLL be ReCOVErEd from the semantics. leT $\BOlD M=(\N, \leq, \D_i)_{I\in \omeGA}$ bE tHE Kripke fRaMe wIth $D_I=\n$ For evEry $i$, ANd Let $\N=\bigcUp_{n\in \oMEgA} B_N$, where $B_N$ iS a sequEnCe oF paIrwisE DisjOint inFinite seTs. We dEFine the relatioN $\Models$ on atomiC FoRMUlAS. Let $M\in \n$. If $m=2n+1$, and $s\in {}^{\OmegA}\n,$ theN $m\moDElS p_0[s]$ IF $s_0\in \bIgcup_{I\lEQ 2n+1}b_I$, $m\models p_1[s]$ if $s_0\in \bigcUp_{I\leq 2n+1}B_I$ and $m\Models p_3[s]$.

If $m=2n$, aNd $s\in {}^{\omega}\n,$ THEn $m\modelS p_0[s]$ iF $S_0\iN \Bigcup_{i\leq n
 $\psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\t heta_2)$.Simil arl y,$\ psi_ 2(\t heta_2)=\psi(\ t heta _2).$ So, it readily f ollow st hat$ (\ psi(\ theta_1 ) )_ { k _0} (I d) =1$  a n d$(\ps i(\ theta_2 ))_{k_0}(I d)= 0$ . This contr a di cts that $ \ps i(\theta_1)\ leq  \psi( \t het a _2),$  an d weare do n e.

Wh en $G$ co ns i sts on l y of fi n i te  tra nsformations and$ v\ s im \rho(p)$ is  infin it e ,t h en${\ mathfrak L }_ G^{=} $  has th e  i n t e rpo l ation propert y.

In then ext  examp le , w e  showthatth e  co ndition $\G amma _0\subset eq \Ga m ma_0^*$ cannotbe omi tte d.Thee xa mp leis ana nalg e bra ic versi on  o f the orem 4 . 3 1, p .12 1 in  [@b] , but modifie d a ppro p ria telyto de al w it h inf initar y lan gu ages.

\[counte r\]
Let $G$beastr on gly r i ch sem igr oup  on $\o mega$.L et$\ L a m bd a_{\omega}$ be a l an g u ag e with t hree p r ed ic a te symbo ls  ea ch o f arity  $\o m eg a$; this  is at yp le ss logi cabstra ct ing  aw ay fr o m ra nk ofatomic f ormul a s, so that wem ight as wellf or g e ta bout  th e variables , si n ce w e al l ow  th e m onl y inth e ir natural order. There al ran k ofsuch relation  symbols w i l l  be reco vere d  f r om the semanti cs. L et $\boldM =(\N, \l eq, \ D_i)_{i\ in \omega } $  be theKri pke  fr ame w it h $D_i=\N$ fo r ever y$i$, an d l et $\N= \bi gcu p_{ n\i n\omega} B _n$, whe re  $ B_ n$  is  a se q uence of  p air wi sedisjo i nt inf inite  set s.  W e  de fine th e  r e l atio n$\ mode ls$  o n ato micf orm ulas. L et $m\in\N$ .  If$m =2 n+1$, a nd $s\in {}^{ \o mega}\N,$th en$m\mod e l s p_0[s] $ if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i \ leq 2n+ 1}B _i$,$m\m odels p_1 [s] $ if $ s_0 \ in \bi gcup_{ i\leq  2 n+1 } B _i$ a n d  $ m\m od els p_3[s] $ . 

I f $m= 2n $, a nd $s\i n {}^{\omega}\N,$t hen  $m\models p_ 0[s ]$ i f $s _0\ i n\ big cu p _{i \ l eq n
 $\psi_1(\theta_1)=\psi(\theta_2)$._Similarly, $\psi_2(\theta_2)=\psi(\theta_2).$_So, it readily follows_that $(\psi(\theta_1))_{k_0}(Id)=1$_and_$(\psi(\theta_2))_{k_0}(Id)=0$. This_contradicts_that $\psi(\theta_1)\leq \psi(\theta_2),$_and we are_done.

When $G$ consists only_of finite transformations_and_$v\sim \rho(p)$ is infinite, then ${\mathfrak L}_G^{=}$ has the interpolation property.

In the next example,_we_show that_the_condition_$\Gamma_0\subseteq \Gamma_0^*$ cannot be omitted._The example is an an_algebraic version_of theorem 4.31, p.121 in [@b], but modified_appropriately_to deal with_infinitary languages.

\[counter\]

Let $G$ be a strongly rich semigroup on_$\omega$. Let $\Lambda_{\omega}$ be a language_with three predicate_symbols_each_of arity $\omega$; this_is a typless logic abstracting away_from rank of atomic formulas, so_that we might as well forget about_the variables, since we allow them_only in their natural order._The real_rank of such relation symbols_will be recovered_from the_semantics. Let $\bold_M=(\N, \leq, \D_i)_{i\in \omega}$ be the_Kripke frame with_$D_i=\N$ for every $i$, and let_$\N=\bigcup_{n\in_\omega} B_n$, where_$B_n$_is_a sequence_of pairwise disjoint_infinite_sets. We_define_the relation $\models$ on atomic formulas._Let_$m\in \N$. If $m=2n+1$, and $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$_then $m\models p_0[s]$ if_$s_0\in_\bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$, $m\models p_1[s]$_if $s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq 2n+1}B_i$ and_$m\models p_3[s]$.

If $m=2n$, and $s\in {}^{\omega}\N,$_then $m\models_p_0[s]$ if_$s_0\in \bigcup_{i\leq n