Abstract
Feedback is oracle computability when the oracle consists exactly of the con- and divergence information about computability relative to that same oracle. Here we study the feedback version of the hyperjump.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
This child is to be thought of as a piece of syntax acting as a placeholder, and not, for instance, as feedback computation, for which angle brackets \(\langle \rangle \) are also used.
- 2.
Sometimes we will have occasion to consider the computation \(\{\bar{e}\}(k)\) instead. Then implicity \(e = \langle \bar{e}, k \rangle \).
- 3.
It bears mention that there are several options for dealing with this clause. In all cases, the evidence that n is not an ordinal notation is that its tree \(U^{P}_{n}\) of smaller ordinal notations is bad somehow, either ill-formed or ill-founded. For \(P^+\), we took this in the strictest possible sense: \(U^{P}_{n}\) had to be non-freezing in order to qualify as evidence. For \( P^{ \& }\), there is no such requirement on \(U^P_n\) ever; once we have any evidence that \(U^{P}_{n}\) will not be acceptable, we take it. In contrast with both of these, one could work in the middle. That is, the reasons that \(U^{P}_{n}\) activate clause 2 are that it has a node not of the right form, or that the function named by a node is partial, or that the function named by a node is not increasing (in the sense of \(<_{P}\)), or that the tree has an infinite descending path; the requirement that \(U^{P}_{n}\) be non-freezing could, in principle, be levied on some and not all of these conditions. We find the two extreme cases isolated here to be the most natural ones; we believe that the only condition of any real importance is the well-foundedness of \(U^{P}_{n}\), and that varying the others will make no difference; determining this is left for future work.
References
Ackerman, N., Freer, C., Lubarsky, R.: Feedback turing computability, and turing computability as feedback. In: Proceedings of LICS 2015, Kyoto, Japan (2015). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Ackerman, N., Freer, C., Lubarsky, R.: An introduction to feedback turing computability. J. Log. Comput., special issue on LFCS ’16 (2020, submitted). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Arnold, A., Niwinski, D.: Rudiments of \(\mu \)-Calculus. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 146. North Holland, Amsterdam (2001)
Barwise, J.: Admissible Sets and Structures. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer, Berlin (1975)
Gostanian, R.: The next admissible ordinal. Ann. Math. Log. 17, 171–203 (1979)
Kleene, S.C.: Recursive functionals and quantifiers of finite types I. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 91, 1–53 (1959)
Lubarsky, R.: \(\mu \)-definable sets of integers. J. Symb. Log. 58(1), 291–313 (1993)
Lubarsky, R.: ITTMs with feedback. In: Schindler, R. (ed.) Ways of Proof Theory, pp. 341–354. Ontos, Frankfurt (2010). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Lubarsky, R.S.: Parallel feedback turing computability. In: Artemov, S., Nerode, A. (eds.) LFCS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9537, pp. 236–250. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27683-0_17
Moschovakis, Y.: Descriptive Set Theory, 1st edn. North Holland, Amsterdam (1987). 2nd edn. AMS (2009)
Richter, W., Aczel, P.: Inductive definitions and reflecting properties of admissible ordinals. In: Fenstad, J.E., Hinman, P.G. (eds.) Generalized Recursion Theory, pp. 301–381. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1974)
Rogers, H.: Theory of Recursive Functions and Effective Computability. McGraw-Hill, New York (1967)
Sacks, G.: Higher Recursion Theory. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer, Berlin (1990)
Tanaka, K.: The Galvin-Prikry theorem and set existence axioms. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 42(1), 81–104 (1989)
Tanaka, K.: Weak axioms of determinacy and subsystems of analysis II (\(\Sigma ^0_2\) games). Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 52(1–2), 181–193 (1991)
Welch, P.: G\(_{\delta \sigma }\)-games and generalized computation (to appear)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lubarsky, R.S. (2020). Feedback Hyperjump. In: Artemov, S., Nerode, A. (eds) Logical Foundations of Computer Science. LFCS 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11972. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36755-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36755-8_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36754-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36755-8
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)