We extend the construction of Mitchell and Steel to produce iterable fine structure models which may contain Woodin limits of Woodin cardinals, and more. The precise level reached is that of a cardinal which is both a Woodin cardinal and a limit of cardinals strong past it.

We generalize results of [3] and [1] to hyperprojective sets of reals, viz. to more than finitely many strong cardinals being involved. We show, for example, that if every set of reals in Lω is weakly homogeneously Souslin, then there is an inner model with an inaccessible limit of strong cardinals.

We present equiconsistency results at the level of subcompact cardinals. Assuming SBHδ, a special case of the Strategic Branches Hypothesis, we prove that if δ is a Woodin cardinal and both □ and □δ fail, then δ is subcompact in a class inner model. If in addition □ fails, we prove that δ is Π12\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Pi_1^2}$$\end{document} subcompact in a class inner model. These results are optimal, and lead to equiconsistencies. As a corollary (...) we also see that assuming the existence of a Woodin cardinal δ so that SBHδ holds, the Proper Forcing Axiom implies the existence of a class inner model with a Π12\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Pi_1^2}$$\end{document} subcompact cardinal. Our methods generalize to higher levels of the large cardinal hierarchy, that involve long extenders, and large cardinal axioms up to δ is δ+ supercompact for all n < ω. We state some results at this level, and indicate how they are proved. (shrink)

The main theorem is that the Ultrafilter Axiom of Woodin :115–37, 2011) must fail at all cardinals where the Axiom I0 holds, in all non-strategic extender models subject only to fairly general requirements on the non-strategic extender model.

In so-called full second-order logic, the second-order variables range over all subsets and relations of the domain in question. In so-called Henkin second-order logic, every model is endowed with a set of subsets and relations which will serve as the range of the second-order variables. In our Boolean-valued second-order logic, the second-order variables range over all Boolean-valued subsets and relations on the domain. We show that under large cardinal assumptions Boolean-valued second-order logic is more robust than full second-order logic. Its (...) validity is absolute under forcing, and its Hanf and Löwenheim numbers are smaller than those of full second-order logic. (shrink)

Let M\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathcal{M}}$$\end{document} be a fine structural mouse. Let D\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathbb{D}}$$\end{document} be a fully backgrounded L[E]\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${L[\mathbb{E}]}$$\end{document}-construction computed inside an iterable coarse premouse S. We describe a process comparing M\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathcal{M}}$$\end{document} with D\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathbb{D}}$$\end{document}, through forming iteration trees on M\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} (...) \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathcal{M}}$$\end{document} and on S. We then prove that this process succeeds. (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.

We introduce two new iteration games: the game , which is a strengthening of the weak iteration game, and the game , which is somewhat stronger than but weaker than the full iteration game of length ω1. For a countable M elementarily embeddable in some Vη, with two players I and II, we can show that II wins and that I does not win.

We produce counterexamples to the unique and cofinal branches hypotheses, assuming (slightly less than) the existence of a cardinal which is strong past a Woodin cardinal.

Fix a cardinal κ. We can ask the question: what kind of a logic L is needed to characterize all models of cardinality κ up to isomorphism by their L-theories? In other words: for which logics L it is true that if any models A and B of cardinality κ satisfy the same L-theory then they are isomorphic?It is always possible to characterize models of cardinality κ by their Lκ+,κ+-theories, but we are interested in finding a “small” logic L, i.e., (...) the sentences of L are hereditarily of smaller cardinality than κ. For any cardinal κ it is independent of ZFC whether any such small definable logic L exists. If it exists it can be second order logic for κ=ω and fourth order logic or certain infinitary second order logic Lκ,ω source for uncountable κ. All models of cardinality κ can always be characterized by their theories in a small logic with generalized quantifiers, but the logic may be not definable in the language of set theory. Our work continues and extends the work of Ajtai [Miklos Ajtai, Isomorphism and higher order equivalence, Ann. Math. Logic 16 181–203]. (shrink)

In this paper, we sketch the development of two important themes of modern set theory, both of which can be regarded as growing out of work of Kurt Gödel. We begin with a review of some basic concepts and conventions of set theory.§0. The ordinal numbers were Georg Cantor's deepest contribution to mathematics. After the natural numbers 0, 1, …, n, … comes the first infinite ordinal number ω, followed by ω + 1, ω + 2, …, ω + ω, (...) … and so forth. ω is the first limit ordinal as it is neither 0 nor a successor ordinal. We follow the von Neumann convention, according to which each ordinal number α is identified with the set {ν ∣ ν α} of its predecessors. The ∈ relation on ordinals thus coincides with <. We have 0 = ∅ and α + 1 = α ∪ {α}. According to the usual set-theoretic conventions, ω is identified with the first infinite cardinal ℵ0, similarly for the first uncountable ordinal number ω1 and the first uncountable cardinal number ℵ1, etc. We thus arrive at the following picture:The von Neumann hierarchy divides the class V of all sets into a hierarchy of sets Vα indexed by the ordinal numbers. The recursive definition reads: ;Vλ = ∪v<λVv for limit ordinals λ. We can represent this hierarchy by the following picture. (shrink)

We study the fine structure of the core model for one Woodin cardinal, building of the work of Mitchell and Steel on inner models of the form . We generalize to some combinatorial principles that were shown by Jensen to hold in L. We show that satisfies the statement: “□κ holds whenever κ the least measurable cardinal λ of order λ++”. We introduce a hierarchy of combinatorial principles □κ, λ for 1 λ κ such that □κ□κ, 1 □κ, λ □κ, (...) κ□κ*. We prove that if holds in V. As an application, we show that ZFC + PFA Con. We also obtain one Woodin cardinal as a lower bound on the consistency strength of stationary reflection at κ+ for a singular, countably closed limit cardinal κ such that # exists; likewise for the failure of □κ* at such a κ. (shrink)

In this paper we explore a connection between descriptive set theory and inner model theory. From descriptive set theory, we will take a countable, definable set of reals, A. We will then show that , where is a canonical model from inner model theory. In technical terms, is a “mouse”. Consequently, we say that A is a mouse set. For a concrete example of the type of set A we are working with, let ODnω1 be the set of reals which (...) are ∑n definable over the model Lω1 , from an ordinal parameter. In this paper we will show that for all n 1, ODnω1 is a mouse set. Our work extends some similar results due to D.A. Martin, J.R. Steel, and H. Woodin. Several interesting questions in this area remain open. (shrink)