Computable structures of Scott rank ${\omega_1^{CK}}$ are an important boundary case for structural complexity. While every countable structure is determined, up to isomorphism, by a sentence of ${\mathcal{L}_{\omega_1 \omega}}$ , this sentence may not be computable. We give examples, in several familiar classes of structures, of computable structures with Scott rank ${\omega_1^{CK}}$ whose computable infinitary theories are each ${\aleph_0}$ -categorical. General conditions are given, covering many known methods for constructing computable structures with Scott rank ${\omega_1^{CK}}$ , which guarantee that the (...) resulting structure is a model of an ${\aleph_0}$ -categorical computable infinitary theory. (shrink)

We exploit properties of certain directed graphs, obtained from the families of sets with special effective enumeration properties, to generalize several results in computable model theory to higher levels of the hyperarithmetical hierarchy. Families of sets with such enumeration features were previously built by Selivanov, Goncharov, and Wehner. For a computable successor ordinal α, we transform a countable directed graph into a structure such that has a isomorphic copy if and only if has a computable isomorphic copy.A computable structure is (...) categorical if for all computable isomorphic copies of , there is an isomorphism from onto , which is . We prove that for every computable successor ordinal α, there is a computable, categorical structure, which is not relatively categorical. This generalizes the result of Goncharov that there is a computable, computably categorical structure, which is not relatively computably categorical.An additional relation R on the domain of a computable structure is intrinsically on if in all computable isomorphic copies of , the image of R is . We prove that for every computable successor ordinal α, there is an intrinsically relation on a computable structure, which not relatively intrinsically . This generalizes the result of Manasse that there is an intrinsically computably enumerable relation on a computable structure, which is not relatively intrinsically computably enumerable.The dimension of a structure is the number of computable isomorphic copies, up to isomorphisms. We prove that for every computable successor ordinal α and every n≥1, there is a computable structure with dimension n. This generalizes the result of Goncharov that there is a structure of computable dimension n for every n≥1.Finally, we prove that for every computable successor ordinal α, there is a countable structure with isomorphic copies in just the Turing degrees of sets X such that relative to X is not . In particular, for every finite n, there is a structure with isomorphic copies in exactly the non- Turing degrees. This generalizes the result obtained by Wehner, and independently by Slaman, that there is a structure with isomorphic copies in exactly the nonzero Turing degrees. (shrink)

We show that for every computable limit ordinal α, there is a computable structure A that is $\Delta _\alpha ^0 $ categorical, but not relatively $\Delta _\alpha ^0 $ categorical (equivalently. it does not have a formally $\Sigma _\alpha ^0 $ Scott family). We also show that for every computable limit ordinal a, there is a computable structure A with an additional relation R that is intrinsically $\Sigma _\alpha ^0 $ on A. but not relatively intrinsically $\Sigma _\alpha ^0 $ (...) on A (equivalently, it is not definable by a computable $\Sigma _\alpha $ formula with finitely many parameters). Earlier results in [7], [10], and [8] establish the same facts for computable successor ordinals α. (shrink)

For countable structure, "Scott rank" provides a measure of internal, model-theoretic complexity. For a computable structure, the Scott rank is at most [Formula: see text]. There are familiar examples of computable structures of various computable ranks, and there is an old example of rank [Formula: see text]. In the present paper, we show that there is a computable structure of Scott rank [Formula: see text]. We give two different constructions. The first starts with an arithmetical example due to Makkai, and (...) codes it into a computable structure. The second re-works Makkai's construction, incorporating an idea of Sacks. (shrink)