none; you have to at least claim as an axiom "axioms are things that can be claimed" -- but that's not what's under discussion here: logic and math are neither

none; you have to at least claim as an axiom "axioms are things that can be claimed" -- but that's not what's under discussion here: logic and math are neither of them empirical sciences, after all. my point is that "we define science as empirical falsificationism" is itself nonscientific by its own definition, and that that's OK, still capable of being true, and is a handy way to get stuff done.