We prove the determinacy of all Δ 1 1 games on arbitrary trees, and we use this result and the assumption that a measurable cardinal exists to demonstrate the determinacy of all games on ω ω that belong both to – Π 1 1 and to its dual.

In this paper we will consider two possible definitions of projective subsets of a separable metric space X. A set A subset of or equal to X is Σ11 iff there exists a complete separable metric space Y and Borel set B subset of or equal to X × Y such that A = {x ε X : there existsy ε Y ε B}. Except for the fact that X may not be completely metrizable, this is the classical definition of (...) analytic set and hence has many equivalent definitions, for example, A is Σ11 iff A is relatively analytic in X, i.e., A is the restriction to X of an analytic set in the completion of X. Another definition of projective we denote by ΣX1 or abstract projective subset of X. A set of A subset of or equal to X is ΣX1 iff there exists an n ε ω and a Borel set B subset of or equal to X × Xn such that A = {x ε X:there existsy ε Xn ε B}. These sets ca n be far more pathological. While the family of sets Σ11 is closed under countable intersections and countable unions, there is a consistent example of a separable metric space X where ΣX1 is not closed under countable intersections or countable unions. This takes place in the Cohen real model. Assuming CH, there exists a separable metric space X such that every Σ11 set is Borel in X but there exists a Σ11 set which is not Borel in X2. The space X2 has Borel subsets of arbitrarily large rank while X has bounded Borel rank. This space is a Luzin set and the technique used here is Steel forcing with tagged trees. We give examples of spaces X illustrating the relationship between Σ11 and ΣX1 and give some consistent examples partially answering an abstract projective hierarchy problem of Ulam. (shrink)

We show that the semi-linear ordering principle for continuous functions implies the determinacy of all Wadge and Lipschitz games.

§0. Preface. There has been an expectation that the endgame of the more tenacious problems raised by the Los Angeles ‘cabal’ school of descriptive set theory in the 1970's should ultimately be played out with the use of inner model theory. Questions phrased in the language of descriptive set theory, where both the conclusions and the assumptions are couched in terms that only mention simply definable sets of reals, and which have proved resistant to purely descriptive set theoretic arguments, may (...) at last find their solution through the connection between determinacy and large cardinals.Perhaps the most striking example was given by [24], where the core model theory was used to analyze the structure of HOD and then show that all regular cardinals below ΘL are measurable. John Steel's analysis also settled a number of structural questions regarding HODL, such as GCH.Another illustration is provided by [21]. There an application of large cardinals and inner model theory is used to generalize the Harrington-Martin theorem that determinacy implies )determinacy.However, it is harder to find examples of theorems regarding the structure of the projective sets whose only known proof from determinacy assumptions uses the link between determinacy and large cardinals. We may equivalently ask whether there are second order statements of number theory that cannot be proved under PD–the axiom of projective determinacy–without appealing to the large cardinal consequences of the PD, such as the existence of certain kinds of inner models that contain given types of large cardinals. (shrink)

We show that, assuming the Axiom of Determinacy, every non-selfdual Wadge class can be constructed by starting with those of level $\omega _1$ and iteratively applying the operations of expansion and separated differences. The proof is essentially due to Louveau, and it yields at the same time a new proof of a theorem of Van Wesep. The exposition is self-contained, except for facts from classical descriptive set theory.

We prove a number of results motivated by global questions of uniformity in computabi- lity theory, and universality of countable Borel equivalence relations. Our main technical tool is a game for constructing functions on free products of countable groups. We begin by investigating the notion of uniform universality, first proposed by Montalbán, Reimann and Slaman. This notion is a strengthened form of a countable Borel equivalence relation being universal, which we conjecture is equivalent to the usual notion. With this additional (...) uniformity hypothesis, we can answer many questions concerning how countable groups, probability measures, the subset relation, and increasing unions interact with universality. For many natural classes of countable Borel equivalence relations, we can also classify exactly which are uniformly universal. We also show the existence of refinements of Martin’s ultrafilter on Turing invariant Borel sets to the invariant Borel sets of equivalence relations that are much finer than Turing equivalence. For example, we construct such an ultrafilter for the orbit equivalence relation of the shift action of the free group on countably many generators. These ultrafilters imply a number of structural properties for these equivalence relations. (shrink)

The interaction between large cardinals, determinacy of two-person perfect information games, and inner model theory has been a singularly powerful driving force in modern set theory during the last three decades. For the outsider the intellectual excitement is often tempered by the somewhat daunting technicalities, and the seeming length of study needed to understand the flow of ideas. The purpose of this article is to try and give a short, albeit rather rough, guide to the broad lines of development.

We introduce the notion of -determinacy for Γ a pointclass and E an equivalence relation on a Polish space X. A case of particular interest is the case when E = EG is the shift-action o...

We consider sparseness, smoothness and the Glimm-Effros Dichotomy for the restriction of a Borel equivalence relation on a Polish space to definable subsets of that space.

We generalize two concepts from special cases of Polish group actions to the general case. The two concepts are elementary embeddability, from model theory, and analytic sets, from the usual descriptive set theory.

Let L be a countable language, let I be an isomorphism-type of countable L-structures, and let a∈2ω. We say that I is a-strange if it contains a computable-from-a structure and its Scott rank is exactly ω1a. For all a, a-strange structures exist. Theorem : If C is a collection of ℵ1 isomorphism-types of countable structures, then for a Turing cone of a’s, no member of C is a-strange.

We prove that the determinacy of all Lipschitz games, the determinacy of all Wadge games, and the semi-linear ordering principle for Lipschitz maps are all equivalent.

We characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of the least inner model of “every real has a sharp”. We let #1 be the sharp function on the reals and define two classes of sets, * and *+, which lie strictly between β<ω2- and Δ. We show that the determinacy of * follows from L[#1] “every reak has a sharp”; and we show that the existence of indiscernibles for L[#1] is equivalent to a slightly stronger determinacy hypothesis, the determinacy of (...) *+. (shrink)

We prove a number of results on the determinacy of σ-projective sets of reals, i.e., those belonging to the smallest pointclass containing the open sets and closed under complements, countable unions, and projections. We first prove the equivalence between σ-projective determinacy and the determinacy of certain classes of games of variable length <ω^2 (Theorem 2.4). We then give an elementary proof of the determinacy of σ-projective sets from optimal large-cardinal hypotheses (Theorem 4.4). Finally, we show how to generalize the proof (...) to obtain proofs of the determinacy of σ-projective games of a given countable length and of games with payoff in the smallest σ-algebra containing the projective sets, from corresponding assumptions (Theorem 5.1, Theorem 5.4). (shrink)

We give a new proof of Friedman's conjecture that every uncountable Δ11 set of reals has a member of each hyperdegree greater than or equal to the hyperjump.

We describe the inner models with representatives in all equivalence classes of thin equivalence relations in a given projective pointclass of even level assuming projective determinacy. The main result shows that these models are characterized by their correctness and the property that they correctly compute the tree from the appropriate scale. The main step towards this characterization shows that the tree from a scale can be reconstructed in a generic extension of an iterate of a mouse. We then construct models (...) with this property as generic extensions of iterates of mice under the assumption that the corresponding projective ordinal is below ω2ω2. On the way, we consider several related problems, including the question when forcing does not add equivalence classes to thin projective equivalence relations. For instance, we show that if every set has a sharp, then reasonable forcing does not add equivalence classes to thin provably View the MathML source Δ1/3 equivalence relations, and generalize this to all projective levels. (shrink)

From the hypothesis that all Turing closed games are determined we prove: (1) the Continuum Hypothesis and (2) every subset of ℵ1 is constructible from a real.

We give upper and lower bounds for the strength of ordinal definable determinacy in a small admissible set. The upper bound is roughly a premouse with a measurable cardinal $\kappa$ of Mitchell order $\kappa^{++}$ and $\omega$ successors. The lower bound are models of ZFC with sequences of measurable cardinals, extending the work of Lewis, below a regular limit of measurable cardinals.

In this paper I shall present a method for proving determinacy from large cardinals which, in many cases, seems to yield optimal results. One of the main applications extends theorems of Martin, Steel and Woodin about determinacy within the projective hierarchy. The method can also be used to give a new proof of Woodin's theorem about determinacy in L.The reason we look for optimal determinacy proofs is not only vanity. Such proofs serve to tighten the connection between large cardinals and (...) descriptive set theory, letting us bring our knowledge of one subject to bear on the other, and thus increasing our understanding of both. A classic example of this is the Harrington-Martin proof that -determinacy implies -determinacy. This is an example of a transfer theorem, which assumes a certain determinacy hypothesis and proves a stronger one. While the statement of the theorem makes no mention of large cardinals, its proof goes through 0#, first proving that-determinacy ⇒ 0# exists,and then that0# exists ⇒ -determinacyMore recent examples of the connection between large cardinals and descriptive set theory include Steel's proof thatADL ⇒ HODL ⊨ GCH,see [9], and several results of Woodin about models of AD+, a strengthening of the axiom of determinacy AD which Woodin has introduced. These proofs not only use large cardinals, but also reveal a deep, structural connection between descriptive set theoretic notions and notions related to large cardinals. (shrink)

We present a general lemma which allows proving determinacy from Woodin cardinals. The lemma can be used in many different settings. As a particular application we prove the determinacy of sets in [Formula: see text], n ≥ 1. The assumption we use to prove [Formula: see text] determinacy is optimal in the base theory of [Formula: see text] determinacy.

We prove the following result which is due to the third author. Let [Formula: see text]. If [Formula: see text] determinacy and [Formula: see text] determinacy both hold true and there is no [Formula: see text]-definable [Formula: see text]-sequence of pairwise distinct reals, then [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable. The proof yields that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies that [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable for all reals [Formula: see text]. A consequence is (...) the Determinacy Transfer Theorem for arbitrary [Formula: see text], namely the statement that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies [Formula: see text] determinacy. (shrink)

Suppose that any two Π12 sets are comparable in the sense of Wadge degrees. Then every real has a dagger. This argument proceeds by using the Dodd-Jensen core model theory to show that x ε ωω along with, say, “0† implies the existence of a Π12 norm of length u2. As a result of more recent work by John Steel, the same argument will extend to show that the Wadge comparability of all Π12 sets implies Π12 determinacy.

§0. Preface. There has been an expectation that the endgame of the more tenacious problems raised by the Los Angeles ‘cabal’ school of descriptive set theory in the 1970's should ultimately be played out with the use of inner model theory. Questions phrased in the language of descriptive set theory, where both the conclusions and the assumptions are couched in terms that only mention simply definable sets of reals, and which have proved resistant to purely descriptive set theoretic arguments, may (...) at last find their solution through the connection between determinacy and large cardinals.Perhaps the most striking example was given by [24], where the core model theory was used to analyze the structure of HOD and then show that all regular cardinals below ΘL are measurable. John Steel's analysis also settled a number of structural questions regarding HODL, such as GCH.Another illustration is provided by [21]. There an application of large cardinals and inner model theory is used to generalize the Harrington-Martin theorem that determinacy implies )determinacy.However, it is harder to find examples of theorems regarding the structure of the projective sets whose only known proof from determinacy assumptions uses the link between determinacy and large cardinals. We may equivalently ask whether there are second order statements of number theory that cannot be proved under PD–the axiom of projective determinacy–without appealing to the large cardinal consequences of the PD, such as the existence of certain kinds of inner models that contain given types of large cardinals. (shrink)

We prove that the determinacy of Gale-Stewart games whose winning sets are accepted by realtime 1-counter Büchi automata is equivalent to the determinacy of analytic Gale-Stewart games which is known to be a large cardinal assumption. We show also that the determinacy of Wadge games between two players in charge ofω-languages accepted by 1-counter Büchi automata is equivalent to the analytic Wadge determinacy. Using some results of set theory we prove that one can effectively construct a 1-counter Büchi automatonand a (...) Büchi automatonsuch that: There exists a model of ZFC in which Player 2 has a winning strategy in the Wadge gameW,L()); There exists a model of ZFC in which the Wadge gameW,L()) is not determined. Moreover these are the only two possibilities, i.e. there are no models of ZFC in which Player 1 has a winning strategy in the Wadge gameW,L()). (shrink)

For several partial sharp functions # on the reals, we characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of indiscernibles for several inner models of “# exists for every real r”. Let #10=1#10 be the identity function on the reals. Inductively define the partial sharp function, β#1γ+1, on the reals so that #1γ+1 =1#1γ+1 codes indiscernibles for L [#11, #12,…, #1γ] and #1γ+1=#1γ+1). We sho w that the existence of β#1γ follows from the determinacy of *Σ01)*+ games . Part I proves (...) the converse. (shrink)

DuBose, D.A., Determinacy and the sharp function on the reals, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 55 237–263. We characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of the least inner model of “every real has a sharp”. We let 1 be the sharp function on the reals and define two classes of sets, * and *+, which lie strictly between β<ω2 an d Δ. We show that the determinacy of * follows from L[#1] xvR; “every real has a sharp”; and (...) we show that the existence of indiscernibles for L[#1] is equivalent to a slightly determinacy hypothesis, the determinacy of *+. (shrink)

We prove that various classical tree forcings—for instance Sacks forcing, Mathias forcing, Laver forcing, Miller forcing and Silver forcing—preserve the statement that every real has a sharp and hence analytic determinacy. We then lift this result via methods of inner model theory to obtain level-by-level preservation of projective determinacy (PD). Assuming PD, we further prove that projective generic absoluteness holds and no new equivalence classes are added to thin projective transitive relations by these forcings.