Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Complexity of equivalence relations and preorders from computability theory.Egor Ianovski, Russell Miller, Keng Meng Ng & André Nies - 2014 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 79 (3):859-881.
    We study the relative complexity of equivalence relations and preorders from computability theory and complexity theory. Given binary relationsR,S, a componentwise reducibility is defined byR≤S⇔ ∃f∀x, y[x R y↔fS f].Here,fis taken from a suitable class of effective functions. For us the relations will be on natural numbers, andfmust be computable. We show that there is a${\rm{\Pi }}_1^0$-complete equivalence relation, but no${\rm{\Pi }}_k^0$-complete fork≥ 2. We show that${\rm{\Sigma }}_k^0$preorders arising naturally in the above-mentioned areas are${\rm{\Sigma }}_k^0$-complete. This includes polynomial timem-reducibility on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Duality, non-standard elements, and dynamic properties of r.e. sets.V. Yu Shavrukov - 2016 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 167 (10):939-981.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)The∀∃ theory of Peano Σ1 sentences.Per Lindström & V. Yu Shavrukov - 2008 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 8 (2):251-280.
    We present a decision procedure for the ∀∃ theory of the lattice of Σ1 sentences of Peano Arithmetic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Splitting theorems in recursion theory.Rod Downey & Michael Stob - 1993 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 65 (1):1-106.
    A splitting of an r.e. set A is a pair A1, A2 of disjoint r.e. sets such that A1 A2 = A. Theorems about splittings have played an important role in recursion theory. One of the main reasons for this is that a splitting of A is a decomposition of A in both the lattice, , of recursively enumerable sets and in the uppersemilattice, R, of recursively enumerable degrees . Thus splitting theor ems have been used to obtain results about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Orbits of computably enumerable sets: low sets can avoid an upper cone.Russell Miller - 2002 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 118 (1-2):61-85.
    We investigate the orbit of a low computably enumerable set under automorphisms of the partial order of c.e. sets under inclusion. Given an arbitrary low c.e. set A and an arbitrary noncomputable c.e. set C, we use the New Extension Theorem of Soare to construct an automorphism of mapping A to a set B such that CTB. Thus, the orbit in of the low set A cannot be contained in the upper cone above C. This complements a result of Harrington, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Variations on promptly simple sets.Wolfgang Maass - 1985 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (1):138-148.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)-Maximal sets.Peter A. Cholak, Peter Gerdes & Karen Lange - 2015 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 80 (4):1182-1210.
    Soare [20] proved that the maximal sets form an orbit in${\cal E}$. We consider here${\cal D}$-maximal sets, generalizations of maximal sets introduced by Herrmann and Kummer [12]. Some orbits of${\cal D}$-maximal sets are well understood, e.g., hemimaximal sets [8], but many are not. The goal of this paper is to define new invariants on computably enumerable sets and to use them to give a complete nontrivial classification of the${\cal D}$-maximal sets. Although these invariants help us to better understand the${\cal D}$-maximal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)${\Cal d}$-maximal sets.Peter A. Cholak, Peter Gerdes & Karen Lange - 2015 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 80 (4):1182-1210.
    Soare [20] proved that the maximal sets form an orbit in${\cal E}$. We consider here${\cal D}$-maximal sets, generalizations of maximal sets introduced by Herrmann and Kummer [12]. Some orbits of${\cal D}$-maximal sets are well understood, e.g., hemimaximal sets [8], but many are not. The goal of this paper is to define new invariants on computably enumerable sets and to use them to give a complete nontrivial classification of the${\cal D}$-maximal sets. Although these invariants help us to better understand the${\cal D}$-maximal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Definable incompleteness and Friedberg splittings.Russell Miller - 2002 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (2):679-696.
    We define a property R(A 0 , A 1 ) in the partial order E of computably enumerable sets under inclusion, and prove that R implies that A 0 is noncomputable and incomplete. Moreover, the property is nonvacuous, and the A 0 and A 1 which we build satisfying R form a Friedberg splitting of their union A, with A 1 prompt and A promptly simple. We conclude that A 0 and A 1 lie in distinct orbits under automorphisms of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The complexity of orbits of computably enumerable sets.Peter A. Cholak, Rodney Downey & Leo A. Harrington - 2008 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (1):69 - 87.
    The goal of this paper is to announce there is a single orbit of the c.e. sets with inclusion, ε, such that the question of membership in this orbit is ${\Sigma _1^1 }$ -complete. This result and proof have a number of nice corollaries: the Scott rank of ε is $\omega _1^{{\rm{CK}}}$ + 1; not all orbits are elementarily definable; there is no arithmetic description of all orbits of ε; for all finite α ≥ 9, there is a properly $\Delta (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Diagonals and d-maximal sets.Eberhard Herrmann & Martin Kummer - 1994 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 59 (1):60-72.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations