An extension of the nondiamond theorem in classical and α-recursion theory

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 586-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus Ambos-Spies
Keyword(s):  
Boolean Algebra ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Upper Bounds ◽  
Minimal Pair ◽  
Splitting Theorem ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Interesting Corollary ◽  
Image Position

Lachlan's nondiamond theorem [7, Theorem 5] asserts that there is no embedding of the four-element Boolean algebra (diamond) in the recursively enumerable degrees which preserves infima, suprema, and least and greatest elements. Lachlan observed that, essentially by relativization, the theorem can be extended toUsing the Sacks splitting theorem he concluded that there exists a pair of r.e. degrees which does not have an infimum, thus showing that the r.e. degrees do not form a lattice.We will first prove the following extension of (1):where an r.e. degree a is non-b-cappable if . From (2) we obtain more information about pairs of r.e. degrees without infima: For every nonzero low r.e. degree there exists an incomparable one such that the two degrees do not have an infimum and there is an r.e. degree which is not half of a pair of incomparable r.e. degrees which has an infimum in the low r.e. degrees. Probably the most interesting corollary of (2) is that the join of any cappable r.e. degree (i.e. half of a minimal pair) and any low r.e. degree is incomplete. Consequently there is an incomplete noncappable degree above every incomplete r.e. degree. Cooper's result [3] that ascending sequences of uniformly r.e. degrees can have minimal upper bounds in the set R of r.e. degrees is another corollary of (2).

Nowhere simple sets and the lattice of recursively enumerable sets

1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Shore
Keyword(s):  
Boolean Algebra ◽  
Classification Scheme ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Boolean Algebras ◽  
The Other ◽  
Finite Sets ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Recursively Enumerable Sets ◽  
Simple Sets ◽  
Invariant Properties

Ever since Post [4] the structure of recursively enumerable sets and their classification has been an important area in recursion theory. It is also intimately connected with the study of the lattices and of r.e. sets and r.e. sets modulo finite sets respectively. (This lattice theoretic viewpoint was introduced by Myhill [3].) Key roles in both areas have been played by the lattice of r.e. supersets, , of an r.e. set A (along with the corresponding modulo finite sets) and more recently by the group of automorphisms of and . Thus for example we have Lachlan's deep result [1] that Post's notion of A being hyperhypersimple is equivalent to (or ) being a Boolean algebra. Indeed Lachlan even tells us which Boolean algebras appear as —precisely those with Σ3 representations. There are also many other simpler but still illuminating connections between the older typology of r.e. sets and their roles in the lattice . (r-maximal sets for example are just those with completely uncomplemented.) On the other hand, work on automorphisms by Martin and by Soare [8], [9] has shown that most other Post type conditions on r.e. sets such as hypersimplicity or creativeness which are not obviously lattice theoretic are in fact not invariant properties of .In general the program of analyzing and classifying r.e. sets has been directed at the simple sets. Thus the subtypes of simple sets studied abound — between ten and fifteen are mentioned in [5] and there are others — but there seems to be much less known about the nonsimple sets. The typologies introduced for the nonsimple sets begin with Post's notion of creativeness and add on a few variations. (See [5, §8.7] and the related exercises for some examples.) Although there is a classification scheme for r.e. sets along the simple to creative line (see [5, §8.7]) it is admitted to be somewhat artificial and arbitrary. Moreover there does not seem to have been much recent work on the nonsimple sets.

A jump class of noncappable degrees

1989 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 324-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. B. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Minimal Pair ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Image Position

Friedberg [3] showed that every degree of unsolvability above 0′ is the jump of some degree, and Sacks [9] showed that the degrees above 0′ which are recursively enumerable (r.e.) in 0′ are the jumps of the r.e. degrees.In this paper we examine the extent to which the Sacks jump theorem can be combined with the minimal pair theorem of Lachlan [4] and Yates [13]. We prove below that there is a degree c > 0′ which is r.e. in 0′ but which is not the jump of half a minimal pair of r.e. degrees.This extends Yates' result [13] proving the existence of noncappable degrees (that is, r.e. degrees a < 0′ for which there is no corresponding r.e. b > 0 with a ∩ b = 0).It also throws more light on the class PS of promptly simple degrees. It was shown by Ambos-Spies, Jockusch, Shore and Soare [1] that PS coincides with the class NC of noncappable degrees, and with the class LC of all low-cuppable degrees, and (using earlier work of Maass, Shore and Stob [5]) that PS splits every class Hn or Ln, n ≥ 0, in the high-low hierarchy of r.e. degrees.If c > 0′, with c r.e. in 0′, letand call c−1 the jump class for c. It is easy to see that every jump class contains members of PS (= NC = LC). By Sacks [8] there exists a low a ∈ LC, where of course [a, 0′] (= {br.e. ∣a ≤ b ≤ 0′}) ⊆ LC = PS. But by Robinson [7] [a, 0′] intersects with every jump class.

Minimal pairs and high recursively enumerable degrees

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 655-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. B. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Recursive Function ◽  
Uniform Method ◽  
Minimal Pair ◽  
Minimal Pairs ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Finite Approximations ◽  
Degree Bounds ◽  
Recursively Enumerable Degree ◽  
Image Position ◽  
High Set

A. H. Lachlan [2] and C. E. M. Yates [4] independently showed that minimal pairs of recursively enumerable (r.e.) degrees exist. Lachlan and Richard Ladner have shown (unpublished) that there is no uniform method for producing a minimal pair of r.e. degrees below a given nonzero r.e. degree. It is not known whether every nonzero r.e. degree bounds a r.e. minimal pair, but in the present paper it is shown (uniformly) that every high r.e. degree bounds a r.e. minimal pair. (A r.e. degree is said to be high if it contains a high set in the sense of Robert W. Robinson [3].)Theorem. Let a be a recursively enumerable degree for which a′ = 0″. Then there are recursively enumerable degrees b0 and b1 such that0 < bi < a for each i ≤ 1, and b0 ⋂ b1 = 0.The proof is based on the Lachlan minimal r.e. pair construction. For notation see Lachlan [2] or S. B. Cooper [1].By Robinson [3] we can choose a r.e. representative A of the degree a, with uniformly recursive tower {As, ∣ s ≥ 0} of finite approximations to A, such that CA dominates every recursive function whereWe define, stage by stage, finite sets Bi,s, i ≤ 1, s ≥ 0, in such a way that Bi, s + 1 ⊇ Bi,s for each i, s, and {Bi,s ∣ i ≤ 1, s ≥ 0} is uniformly recursive.

Least upper bounds for minimal pairs of α-R.E. α-degrees

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Lerman
Keyword(s):  
Characteristic Function ◽  
Upper Bound ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Upper Bounds ◽  
Minimal Pair ◽  
Upper Semilattice ◽  
Minimal Pairs ◽  
Limit Ordinal ◽  
Recursion Theorem ◽  
Admissible Ordinals

The application of priority arguments to study the structure of the upper semilattice of α-r.e. α-degrees for all admissible ordinals α was first done successfully by Sacks and Simpson [5] who proved that there exist incomparable α-r.e. α-degrees. Lerman and Sacks [3] studied the existence of minimal pairs of α-r.e. α-degrees, and proved their existence for all admissible ordinals α which are not refractory. We continue the study of the α-r.e. α-degrees, and prove that no minimal pair of α-r.e. α-degrees can have as least upper bound the complete α-r.e. α-degree.The above-mentioned theorem was first proven for α = ω by Lachlan [1]. Our proof for α = ω differs from Lachlan's in that we eliminate the use of the recursion theorem. The proofs are similar, however, and a knowledge of Lachlan's proof will be of considerable aid in reading this paper.We assume that the reader is familiar with the basic notions or α-recursion theory, which can be found in [2] or [5].Throughout the paper a will be an arbitrary admissible ordinal. We identify a set A ⊆ α with its characteristic function, A(x) = 1 if x ∈ A, and A(x) = 0 if x ∉ A.If A ⊆ α and B ⊆ α, then A ⊕ B will denote the set defined byA ⊕ B(x) = A(y) if x = λ + 2z, λ is a limit ordinal, z < ω and y = λ + z,= B(y) if x = λ + 2z + 1, λ is a limit ordinal, z < ω, and y = λ + z.

α-degrees of α-theories

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Metakides
Keyword(s):  
Initial Segment ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Infinite Length ◽  
Infinitary Logic ◽  
Admissible Set ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Limit Ordinal ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Further Development

Let α be a limit ordinal with the property that any “recursive” function whose domain is a proper initial segment of α has its range bounded by α. α is then called admissible (in a sense to be made precise later) and a recursion theory can be developed on it (α-recursion theory) by providing the generalized notions of α-recursively enumerable, α-recursive and α-finite. Takeuti [12] was the first to study recursive functions of ordinals, the subject owing its further development to Kripke [7], Platek [8], Kreisel [6], and Sacks [9].Infinitary logic on the other hand (i.e., the study of languages which allow expressions of infinite length) was quite extensively studied by Scott [11], Tarski, Kreisel, Karp [5] and others. Kreisel suggested in the late '50's that these languages (even which allows countable expressions but only finite quantification) were too large and that one should only allow expressions which are, in some generalized sense, finite. This made the application of generalized recursion theory to the logic of infinitary languages appear natural. In 1967 Barwise [1] was the first to present a complete formalization of the restriction of to an admissible fragment (A a countable admissible set) and to prove that completeness and compactness hold for it. [2] is an excellent reference for a detailed exposition of admissible languages.

Functions regular in the unit circle

1956 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. N. Linden ◽  
M. L. Cartwright
Keyword(s):  
Unit Circle ◽  
Positive Constant ◽  
Upper Bounds ◽  
Image Position

Letbe a function regular for | z | < 1. With the hypotheses f(0) = 0 andfor some positive constant α, Cartwright(1) has deduced upper bounds for |f(z) | in the unit circle. Three cases have arisen and according as (1) holds with α < 1, α = 1 or α > 1, the bounds on each circle | z | = r are given respectively byK(α) being a constant which depends only on the corresponding value of α which occurs in (1). We shall always use the symbols K and A to represent constants dependent on certain parameters such as α, not necessarily having the same value at each occurrence.

On the Representation of Boolean Algebras

1962 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Günter Bruns
Keyword(s):  
Boolean Algebra ◽  
Boolean Algebras ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
Image Position

Let B be a Boolean algebra and let ℳ and n be two systems of subsets of B, both containing all finite subsets of B. Let us assume further that the join ∨M of every set M∊ℳ and the meet ∧N of every set N∊n exist. Several authors have treated the question under which conditions there exists an isomorphism φ between B and a field δ of sets, satisfying the conditions:

scholarly journals Extremal Problems for Functions Starlike in the Exterior of the Unit Circle

1962 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 540-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. C. Royster
Keyword(s):  
Unit Circle ◽  
Analytic Functions ◽  
Upper Bounds ◽  
Extremal Problems ◽  
Simple Pole ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Inverse Functions ◽  
Variational Formulas

Let Σ represent the class of analytic functions(1)which are regular, except for a simple pole at infinity, and univalent in |z| > 1 and map |z| > 1 onto a domain whose complement is starlike with respect to the origin. Further let Σ- 1 be the class of inverse functions of Σ which at w = ∞ have the expansion(2).In this paper we develop variational formulas for functions of the classes Σ and Σ- 1 and obtain certain properties of functions that extremalize some rather general functionals pertaining to these classes. In particular, we obtain precise upper bounds for |b2| and |b3|. Precise upper bounds for |b1|, |b2| and |b3| are given by Springer (8) for the general univalent case, provided b0 =0.

Register machine proof of the theorem on exponential diophantine representation of enumerable sets

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 818-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Jones ◽  
Y. V. Matijasevič
Keyword(s):  
Natural Number ◽  
Polynomial Time ◽  
Simple Proof ◽  
Diophantine Equations ◽  
Polynomial Equation ◽  
Exponential Diophantine Equations ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Image Position ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exponential Relation

The purpose of the present paper is to give a new, simple proof of the theorem of M. Davis, H. Putnam and J. Robinson [1961], which states that every recursively enumerable relation A(a1, …, an) is exponential diophantine, i.e. can be represented in the formwhere a1 …, an, x1, …, xm range over natural numbers and R and S are functions built up from these variables and natural number constants by the operations of addition, A + B, multiplication, AB, and exponentiation, AB. We refer to the variables a1,…,an as parameters and the variables x1 …, xm as unknowns.Historically, the Davis, Putnam and Robinson theorem was one of the important steps in the eventual solution of Hilbert's tenth problem by the second author [1970], who proved that the exponential relation, a = bc, is diophantine, and hence that the right side of (1) can be replaced by a polynomial equation. But this part will not be reproved here. Readers wishing to read about the proof of that are directed to the papers of Y. Matijasevič [1971a], M. Davis [1973], Y. Matijasevič and J. Robinson [1975] or C. Smoryński [1972]. We concern ourselves here for the most part only with exponential diophantine equations until §5 where we mention a few consequences for the class NP of sets computable in nondeterministic polynomial time.

Normal Operators on the Banach Space Lp(-∞,∞). Part I

1961 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 505-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregers L. Krabbe
Keyword(s):  
Banach Space ◽  
Boolean Algebra ◽  
Abelian Subalgebra ◽  
The Family ◽  
Normal Operators ◽  
Image Position

Let be the Boolean algebra of all finite unions of subcells of the plane. Denote by εpthe algebra of all linear bounded transformations of Lp(— ∞, ∞) into itself. Suppose for a moment that p = 2, and let Rp be an involutive abelian subalgebra of εp if Rp is also a Banach space and if Tp ∈ Rp, then:(i) The family of all homomorphic mappings of into the algebra Rp contains a member EPT such that(1)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document