We study the proof–theoretic strength and effective content of the infinite form of Ramsey's theorem for pairs. Let RTkndenote Ramsey's theorem fork–colorings ofn–element sets, and let RT<∞ndenote (∀k)RTkn. Our main result on computability is: For anyn≥ 2 and any computable (recursive)k–coloring of then–element sets of natural numbers, there is an infinite homogeneous setXwithX″ ≤T0(n). LetIΣnandBΣndenote the Σninduction and bounding schemes, respectively. Adapting the casen= 2 of the above result (whereXis low2) to models of arithmetic enables us to show that RCA0+IΣ2+ (...) RT22is conservative over RCA0+IΣ2for Π11statements and that RCA0+IΣ3+ RT<∞2is Π11-conservative over RCA0+IΣ3. It follows that RCA0+ RT22does not implyBΣ3. In contrast, J. Hirst showed that RCA0+ RT<∞2does implyBΣ3, and we include a proof of a slightly strengthened version of this result. It follows that RT<∞2is strictly stronger than RT22overRCA0. (shrink)

We prove that RCA₀ + RT $RT\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} 2 \\ 2 \\ \end{array} $ ̸͢ WKL₀ by showing that for any set C not of PA-degree and any set A, there exists an infinite subset G of A or ̅Α, such that G ⊕ C is also not of PA-degree.

We study the degrees of unsolvability of sets which are cohesive . We answer a question raised by the first author in 1972 by showing that there is a cohesive set A whose degree a satisfies a' = 0″ and hence is not high. We characterize the jumps of the degrees of r-cohesive sets, and we show that the degrees of r-cohesive sets coincide with those of the cohesive sets. We obtain analogous results for strongly hyperimmune and strongly hyperhyperimmune sets (...) in place of r-cohesive and cohesive sets, respectively. We show that every strongly hyperimmune set whose degree contains either a Boolean combination of ∑2 sets or a 1-generic set is of high degree. We also study primitive recursive analogues of these notions and in this case we characterize the corresponding degrees exactly. MSC: 03D30, 03D55. (shrink)

We investigate the complexity of various combinatorial theorems about linear and partial orders, from the points of view of computability theory and reverse mathematics. We focus in particular on the principles ADS (Ascending or Descending Sequence), which states that every infinite linear order has either an infinite descending sequence or an infinite ascending sequence, and CAC (Chain-AntiChain), which states that every infinite partial order has either an infinite chain or an infinite antichain. It is well-known that Ramsey's Theorem for pairs (...) (RT₂²) splits into a stable version (SRT₂²) and a cohesive principle (COH). We show that the same is true of ADS and CAC, and that in their cases the stable versions are strictly weaker than the full ones (which is not known to be the case for RT₂² and SRT₂²). We also analyze the relationships between these principles and other systems and principles previously studied by reverse mathematics, such as WKL₀, DNR, and BΣ₂. We show, for instance, that WKL₀ is incomparable with all of the systems we study. We also prove computability-theoretic and conservation results for them. Among these results are a strengthening of the fact, proved by Cholak, Jockusch, and Slaman, that COH is Π₁¹-conservative over the base system RCA₀. We also prove that CAC does not imply DNR which, combined with a recent result of Hirschfeldt, Jockusch, Kjos-Hanssen, Lempp, and Slaman, shows that CAC does not imply SRT₂² (and so does not imply RT₂²). This answers a question of Cholak, Jockusch, and Slaman. Our proofs suggest that the essential distinction between ADS and CAC on the one hand and RT₂² on the other is that the colorings needed for our analysis are in some way transitive. We formalize this intuition as the notions of transitive and semitransitive colorings and show that the existence of homogeneous sets for such colorings is equivalent to ADS and CAC, respectively. We finish with several open questions. (shrink)

We show that, for every partition F of the pairs of natural numbers and for every set C, if C is not recursive in F then there is an infinite set H, such that H is homogeneous for F and C is not recursive in H. We conclude that the formal statement of Ramsey's Theorem for Pairs is not strong enough to prove , the comprehension scheme for arithmetical formulas, within the base theory , the comprehension scheme for recursive formulas. (...) We also show that Ramsey's Theorem for Pairs is strong enough to prove some sentences in first order arithmetic which are not provable within . In particular, Ramsey's Theorem for Pairs is not conservative over for -sentences. (shrink)

The Rainbow Ramsey Theorem is essentially an "anti-Ramsey" theorem which states that certain types of colorings must be injective on a large subset (rather than constant on a large subset). Surprisingly, this version follows easily from Ramsey's Theorem, even in the weak system RCA₀ of reverse mathematics. We answer the question of the converse implication for pairs, showing that the Rainbow Ramsey Theorem for pairs is in fact strictly weaker than Ramsey's Theorem for pairs over RCA₀. The separation involves techniques (...) from the theory of randomness by showing that every 2-random bounds an ω-model of the Rainbow Ramsey Theorem for pairs. These results also provide as a corollary a new proof of Martin's theorem that the hyperimmune degrees have measure one. (shrink)

Stephen George Simpson. with definition 1.2.3 and the discussion following it. For example, taking 90(n) to be the formula n §E Y, we have an instance of comprehension, VYEIXVn(n€X<—>n¢Y), asserting that for any given set Y there exists a ...