We describe the motivation for the construction of a general framework for priority arguments, the ideas incorporated into the construction of the framework, and the use of the framework to prove theorems in computability theory which require priority arguments.

We prove that a enumerable degree is contiguous iff it is locally distributive. This settles a twenty-year old question going back to Ladner and Sasso. We also prove that strong contiguity and contiguity coincide, settling a question of the first author, and prove that no $m$-topped degree is contiguous, settling a question of the first author and Carl Jockusch [11]. Finally, we prove some results concerning local distributivity and relativized weak truth table reducibility.

This paper analyzes several properties of infima in Dn, the n-r.e. degrees. We first show that, for every n> 1, there are n-r.e. degrees a, b, and c, and an -r.e. degree x such that a < x < b, c and, in Dn, b c = a. We also prove a related result, namely that there are two d.r.e. degrees that form a minimal pair in Dn, for each n < ω, but that do not form a minimal pair (...) in Dω. Next, we show that every low r.e. degree branches in the d.r.e. degrees. This result does not extend to the low2 r.e. degrees. We also construct a non-low r.e. degree a such that every r.e. degree b a branches in the d.r.e. degrees. Finally we prove that the nonbranching degrees are downward dense in the d.r.e. degrees. (shrink)

If r is a reducibility between sets of numbers, a natural question to ask about the structure ? r of the r-degrees containing computably enumerable sets is whether every element not equal to the greatest one is branching (i.e., the meet of two elements strictly above it). For the commonly studied reducibilities, the answer to this question is known except for the case of truth-table (tt) reducibility. In this paper, we answer the question in the tt case by showing that (...) every tt-incomplete computably enumerable truth-table degree a is branching in ? tt . The fact that every Turing-incomplete computably enumerable truth-table degree is branching has been known for some time. This fact can be shown using a technique of Ambos-Spies and, as noticed by Nies, also follows from a relativization of a result of Degtev. We give a proof here using the Ambos-Spies technique because it has not yet appeared in the literature. The proof uses an infinite injury argument. Our main result is the proof when a is Turing-complete but tt-incomplete. Here we are able to exploit the Turing-completeness of a in a novel way to give a finite injury proof. (shrink)

Given two incomparable c.e. Turing degrees a and b, we show that there exists a c.e. degree c such that c = (a ⋃ c) ⋂ (b ⋃ c), a ⋃ c | b ⋃ c, and c < a ⋃ b.

In [Countable thin [Formula: see text] classes, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 59 79–139], Cenzer, Downey, Jockusch and Shore proved the density of degrees containing members of countable thin [Formula: see text] classes. In the same paper, Cenzer et al. also proved the existence of degrees containing no members of thin [Formula: see text] classes. We will prove in this paper that the c.e. degrees containing no members of thin [Formula: see text] classes are dense in the c.e. degrees. We will (...) also prove that the c.e. degrees containing members of thin [Formula: see text] classes are dense in the c.e. degrees, improving the result of Cenzer et al. mentioned above. Thus, we obtain a new natural subclass of c.e. degrees which are both dense and co-dense in the c.e. degrees, while the other such class is the class of branching c.e. degrees 113–130] for nonbranching degrees and [T. A. Slaman, The density of infima in the recursively enumerable degrees, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 52 155–179] for branching degrees). (shrink)

We introduce a new hierarchy of computably enumerable degrees. This hierarchy is based on computable ordinal notations measuring complexity of approximation of${\rm{\Delta }}_2^0$functions. The hierarchy unifies and classifies the combinatorics of a number of diverse constructions in computability theory. It does so along the lines of the high degrees (Martin) and the array noncomputable degrees (Downey, Jockusch, and Stob). The hierarchy also gives a number of natural definability results in the c.e. degrees, including a definable antichain.

In this paper we investigate problems about densities ofe-generic,s-generic andp-generic degrees. We, in particular, show that allp-generic degrees are non-branching, which answers an open question by Jockusch who asked: whether alls-generic degrees are non-branching and refutes a conjecture of Ingrassia; the set of degrees containing r.e.p-generic sets is the same as the set of r.e. degrees containing an r.e. non-autoreducible set.

We give a survey of the study of nonstandard models in recursion theory and reverse mathematics. We discuss the key notions and techniques in effective computability in nonstandard models, and their applications to problems concerning combinatorial principles in subsystems of second order arithmetic. Particular attention is given to principles related to Ramsey’s Theorem for Pairs.

Let b and c be r.e. Turing degrees such that b>c. We show that there is an r.e. degree a such that b>a>c and all lattices containing a critical triple, including the lattice M5, cannot be embedded into the interval [c, a].

We show that the theory of the partial ordering of the computably enumerable degrees in any given nontrivial interval is undecidable and has uncountably many 1-types.

Ambos-Spies, K. and R.A. Shore, Undecidability and 1-types in the recursively enumerable degrees, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 63 3–37. We show that the theory of the partial ordering of recursively enumerable Turing degrees is undecidable and has uncountably many 1-types. In contrast to the original proof of the former which used a very complicated O''' argument our proof proceeds by a much simpler infinite injury argument. Moreover, it combines with the permitting technique to get similar results for any (...) ideal of the r.e. degrees. (shrink)

We give an alternative and more informative proof that every incomplete ${\Sigma^{0}_{2}}$ -enumeration degree is the meet of two incomparable ${\Sigma^{0}_{2}}$ -degrees, which allows us to show the stronger result that for every incomplete ${\Sigma^{0}_{2}}$ -enumeration degree a, there exist enumeration degrees x 1 and x 2 such that a, x 1, x 2 are incomparable, and for all b ≤ a, b = (b ∨ x 1 ) ∧ (b ∨ x 2 ).