Skip to main content

Reflection and the priority method in E-recursion theory

  • 304 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Mathematics book series (LNM,volume 1141)

Abstract

A central issue in E-recursion theory is the relative status of E-recursive enumerability and Σ1-definability in an E-closed structure. In most initial segments of L these two are not the same. However, as is shown here, every E-closed initial segment of L is canonically represented as the union of Π1-absolute admissible sets with gaps, in which sets the two notions are identical. This representation is used to prove a meta-theorem which provides a translation of Friedberg-style finite injury constructions from classical recursion theory into successful E-recursion theoretic constructions for initial segments of L. The key to the method is to construe an E-recursive enumeration as a direct limit of Σ1-enumerations, in each of which, requirements are satisfied using techniques from α-recursion theory. Suppose that L k is E-closed; a subset of κ is said to be scattered if its order type is less than ρ k1 , the E-recursively enumerable projectum of L k . As an application of this method, it is shown that there is an E-recursively enumerable degree on L k which is not scattered.

The difference between E-recursive enumerability and Σ1-definability can be used to construct new varieties of recursively enumerable sets. For example, for any given L k there is a complete E-recursively enumerable subset of κ which has order type the Σ1-cofinality of κ; this shows that there is a complete scattered set whenever possible. In addition, it is shown that if the two notions of definability are different in L k then the diamond lattice can be embedded in the E-recursively enumerable degrees on L k preserving meet, join, 0 and 1. This result contrasts with the Lachlan non-diamond theorem, which states that no such embedding exists for the recursively enumerable degrees on ω. As Lachlan's theorem is proven using the finite injury method, this indicates that there is no method for adapting a general finite injury construction from the classical setting to E-recursion on an arbitrary L k .

Keywords

  • Initial Segment
  • Transitive Closure
  • Order Type
  • Minimal Pair
  • Recursion Theory

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

The author was partially supported by NSF grant MCS-8404208 during the preparation of this paper. The results herein are, in part, based upon the author's doctoral thesis, Harvard University, 1981. Thanks are due to Gerald E. Sacks for his advice in all matters important to producing a good thesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. K.J. Devlin, “Aspects of constructibility”, Lecture Notes in Math. 354, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1973.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. R.O. Gandy, Generalized recursive functionals of finite type and hierarchies of functionals, Ann. Fac. Sci. Univ. Clermont-Ferrand 35 (1967), 5–24.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. E.R. Griffor and D. Normann, Effective cofinalities and admissibility in E-recursion, Preprint Series No. 5, Univ. Oslo (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  4. E.R. Griffor, “E-Recursively Enumerable Degrees”, Ph.D. thesis, M.I.T., 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  5. L.A. Harrington, “Contributions to recursion theory on higher types”, Ph.D. thesis, M.I.T., 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. Hrbacek and S.G. Simpson, On the Kleene degrees of analytic sets, in “The Kleene Symposium”, (J. Barwise, H.J. Keisler and K. Kunen eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980, pp. 347–352.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. R.B. Jensen and C. Karp, Primitive recursive set functions, in “Proc. Symp. in Pure Math.”, 13, (D. Scott, ed.), Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, 1971, pp. 143–167.

    Google Scholar 

  8. C.G. Jockusch, Three easy constructions of recursively enumerable sets, in “Logic Year 1979–80 (Lecture Notes in Mathematics 859)”, (M. Lerman, J.H. Shmerl and R.I. Soare eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1981, pp. 83–91.

    Google Scholar 

  9. A.S. Kechris, The theory of countable analytic sets, T.A.M.S. 202 (1975), 259–297.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. D. Normann, Set recursion, in “Generalized Recursion Theory II”, (J.E. Fenstad, R.O. Gandy and G.E. Sacks eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978, pp. 39–54.

    Google Scholar 

  11. _____, Degrees of functionals, Preprint Series No. 22, Univ. Oslo (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  12. G.E. Sacks, The 1-section of a type n object, In “Generalized Recursion Theory”, (J.E. Fenstad, R.O. Gandy and P.G. Hinman eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1974, pp. 81–93.

    Google Scholar 

  13. _____, The k-section of a type n object, Am. Jour. Math. 99 (1977), 901–917.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. _____, Three aspects of recursive enumerability in higher types, in “Recursion Theory: its Generalisations and Applications”, (F.R. Drake and S.S. Wainer eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980, pp. 184–214.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. _____, Post's problem in E-recursion theory, in “Proc. A.M.S. Summer Inst.” (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  16. G.E. Sacks and S.G. Simpson, The α-finite injury method, Ann. Math. Logic 4 (1972), 323–367.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. G.E. Sacks and T.A. Slaman, Inadmissible forcing, Adv. in Math. (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  18. T.A. Slaman, “Aspects of E-recursion”, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard Univ, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  19. _____, The E-recursively enumerable degrees are dense, in “Proc. A.M.S. Summer Inst.” (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  20. _____, Σ1 definitions with parameters, (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  21. _____, On the Kleene degrees of Π 11 sets, (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  22. R.A. Shore, The recursively enumerable α-degrees are dense, Ann. Math. Logic 9 (1976), 123–155.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 1985 Springer-Verlag

About this paper

Cite this paper

Slaman, T.A. (1985). Reflection and the priority method in E-recursion theory. In: Ebbinghaus, HD., Müller, G.H., Sacks, G.E. (eds) Recursion Theory Week. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol 1141. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0076231

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0076231

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-15673-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39596-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive