The notion of CM-triviality was introduced by Hrushovski, who showed that his new strongly minimal sets have this property. Recently Baudisch has shown that his new ω 1 -categorical group has this property. Here we show that any group of finite Morley rank definable in a CM-trivial theory is nilpotent-by-finite, or equivalently no simple group of finite Morley rank can be definable in a CM-trivial theory.

We consider two formalisations of the notion of a compositionalsemantics for a language, and find some equivalent statements in termsof substitutions. We prove a theorem stating necessary and sufficientconditions for the existence of a canonical compositional semanticsextending a given partial semantics, after discussing what features onewould want such an extension to have. The theorem involves someassumptions about semantical categories in the spirit of Husserl andTarski.

We consider two formalisations of the notion of a compositionalsemantics for a language, and find some equivalent statements in termsof substitutions. We prove a theorem stating necessary and sufficientconditions for the existence of a canonical compositional semanticsextending a given partial semantics, after discussing what features onewould want such an extension to have. The theorem involves someassumptions about semantical categories in the spirit of Husserl andTarski.

CM-triviality of a stable theory is a notion introduced by Hrushovski [1]. The importance of this property is first that it holds of Hrushovski's new non 1-based strongly minimal sets, and second that it is still quite a restrictive property, and forbids the existence of definable fields or simple groups (see [2]). In [5], Frank Wagner posed some questions aboutCM-triviality, asking in particular whether a structure of finite rank, which is “coordinatized” byCM-trivial types of rank 1, is itselfCM-trivial. (Actually Wagner (...) worked in a slightly more general context, adapting the definitions to a certain “local” framework, in which algebraic closure is replaced byP-closure, forPsome family of types. We will, however, remain in the standard context, and will just remark here that it is routine to translate our results into Wagner's framework, as well as to generalise to the superstable theory/regular type context.) In any case we answer Wagner's question positively. Also in an attempt to put forward some concrete conjectures about the possible geometries of strongly minimal sets (or stable theories) we tentatively suggest a hierarchy of geometric properties of forking, the first two levels of which correspond to 1-basedness andCM-triviality respectively. We do not know whether this is a strict hierarchy (or even whether these are the “right” notions), but we conjecture that it is, and moreover that a counterexample to Cherlin's conjecture can be found at level three in the hierarchy. (shrink)

CM-triviality of a stable theory is a notion introduced by Hrushovski [1]. The importance of this property is first that it holds of Hrushovski's new non 1-based strongly minimal sets, and second that it is still quite a restrictive property, and forbids the existence of definable fields or simple groups (see [2]). In [5], Frank Wagner posed some questions aboutCM-triviality, asking in particular whether a structure of finite rank, which is “coordinatized” byCM-trivial types of rank 1, is itselfCM-trivial. (Actually Wagner (...) worked in a slightly more general context, adapting the definitions to a certain “local” framework, in which algebraic closure is replaced byP-closure, forPsome family of types. We will, however, remain in the standard context, and will just remark here that it is routine to translate our results into Wagner's framework, as well as to generalise to the superstable theory/regular type context.) In any case we answer Wagner's question positively. Also in an attempt to put forward some concrete conjectures about the possible geometries of strongly minimal sets (or stable theories) we tentatively suggest a hierarchy of geometric properties of forking, the first two levels of which correspond to 1-basedness andCM-triviality respectively. We do not know whether this is a strict hierarchy (or even whether these are the “right” notions), but we conjecture that it is, and moreover that a counterexample to Cherlin's conjecture can be found at level three in the hierarchy. (shrink)

We construct a new class of 1 categorical structures, disproving Zilber's conjecture, and study some of their properties.

In this paper we construct a non-CM-trivial stable theory in which no infinite field is interpretable. In fact our theory will also be trivial and ω-stable, but of infinite Morley rank. A long term aim would be to find a nonCM-trivial theory which has finite Morley rank (or is even strongly minimal) and does not interpret a field. The construction in this paper is direct, and is a “3-dimensional” version of the free pseudoplane. In a sense we are cheating: the (...) original point of the notion ofCM-triviality was to describe the geometry of a strongly minimal set, or even of a regular type. In our example, non-CM-triviality will come from the behaviour of three orthogonal regular types.A stable theory is said to beCM-trivial if wheneverA⊆Band acl(Ac) ∩ acl(B) = acl(A) inTeq, then Cb(stp(c/A)) ⊆ Cb(stp(c/B)). ( An infinite stable field will not beCM-trivial.) The notion is due to Hrushovski [3], where he gave several equivalent definitions, as well as showing that his new strongly minimal sets constructed “ab ovo” wereCM-trivial. The notion was studied further in [6] where it was shown thatCM-trivial groups of finite Morley rank are nilpotent-by-finite. These results were generalized in various ways to the superstable case in [8]. (shrink)

In this paper we construct a non-CM-trivial stable theory in which no infinite field is interpretable. In fact our theory will also be trivial and ω-stable, but of infinite Morley rank. A long term aim would be to find a nonCM-trivial theory which has finite Morley rank (or is even strongly minimal) and does not interpret a field. The construction in this paper is direct, and is a “3-dimensional” version of the free pseudoplane. In a sense we are cheating: the (...) original point of the notion ofCM-triviality was to describe the geometry of a strongly minimal set, or even of a regular type. In our example, non-CM-triviality will come from the behaviour of three orthogonal regular types.A stable theory is said to beCM-trivial if wheneverA⊆Band acl(Ac) ∩ acl(B) = acl(A) inTeq, then Cb(stp(c/A)) ⊆ Cb(stp(c/B)). ( An infinite stable field will not beCM-trivial.) The notion is due to Hrushovski [3], where he gave several equivalent definitions, as well as showing that his new strongly minimal sets constructed “ab ovo” wereCM-trivial. The notion was studied further in [6] where it was shown thatCM-trivial groups of finite Morley rank are nilpotent-by-finite. These results were generalized in various ways to the superstable case in [8]. (shrink)