FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS
|
|
- Frederick Mosley
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS GABRIEL ONANT arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 8 Jan 2014 Abstract. For n 3, define T n to be the theory of the generic K n-free graph, where K n is the complete graph on n vertices. We prove a graph theoretic characterization of dividing in T n, and use it to show that forking and dividing are the same for complete types. We then give an example of a forking and nondividing formula. Altogether, T n provides a counterexample to a recent question of hernikov and Kaplan. 1. Introduction lassification in model theory, beginning with stability theory, is strongly fueled by the study of abstract notions of independence, the frontrunners of which are forking and dividing. These notions have proved useful in the abstract treatment of independence and dimension in the stable setting, and initiated a quest to understand when they are useful in the unstable context. Significant success was achieved in the class of simple theories (see [6]). Meaningful results have also been found for NIP theories and, more generally, NTP 2 theories, which include both simple and NIP. A notable example is the following recent result from [3]. Theorem. Suppose M is a sufficiently saturated monster model of an NTP 2 theory. Given M, the following are equivalent. (i) A partial type forks over if and only if it divides over. (ii) is an extension base for nonforking, i.e. if π( x) is a partial type with parameters from, then π( x) does not fork over. In general, if condition (i) holds for a set, then condition (ii) does as well. In fact, condition (ii) should be thought of as the minimal requirement for nonforking to be meaningful for types over. In particular, if is not an extension base for nonforking, then there are types with no nonforking extensions. There are few examples where condition (ii) fails, and most of them do so by exploiting some kind of circular ordering (see e.g [9, Exercise 7.1.6]). On the other hand, condition (i) is, a priori, harder to achieve. It is useful because it allows us to ignore the subtlety of forking versus dividing. However, in every textbook example where condition (i) fails, it is because condition (ii) also fails. This leads to the natural question, which is asked in [3], of whether the result above extends to classes of theories other than NTP 2. In this paper, we give an example of an NSOP 4 theory in which condition (ii) holds for all sets, but condition (i) fails. We will consider forking and dividing in the theory of a well-known structure: the generic K n -free graph, also known as the Henson graph, a theory with TP 2 and NSOP 4. Our main goal is to characterize forking and dividing in the theory of the Henson graph. We will show that dividing independence has a meaningful graphtheoretic interpretation, and has something to say about the combinatorics of the 1
2 2 GABRIEL ONANT structure. Using this characterization, we will show that despite the complexity of the theory, forking and dividing are the same for complete types. As a consequence, every set is an extension base for nonforking, and so nonforking/nondividing extensions always exist. On the other hand, we will show that there are formulas which fork, but do not divide. Acknowledgements. I would like to thank Lynn Scow, John Baldwin, Artem hernikov, Dave Marker, aroline Terry, and Phil Wesolek for their part in the development of this project. 2. Model Theoretic Preliminaries This section contains the definitions and basic facts concerning forking and dividing. We first specify some conventions that will be maintained throughout the paper. If T is a complete first order theory and M is a monster model of T, we write A M to mean that A is a small subset of M, i.e. A M and M is A + -saturated. We use the letters a,b,c,... to denote singletons, and ā, b, c,... to denote tuples (of possibly infinite length). Definition 2.1. Suppose M, π( x,ȳ) is a partial type with parameters from, and b M. (1) π( x, b) divides over if there is a -indiscernible sequence ( b l ) l<ω, with b0 = b, such that l<ω π( x, b l ) is inconsistent. (2) π( x, b) forks over if there is some D b such that if p S n (D) extends π( x, b) then p divides over. (3) A formula ϕ( x, b) forks (resp. divides) over if {ϕ( x, b)} forks (resp. divides) over. The following basic facts can be found in [9]. Proposition 2.2. Let M. (a) If a complete type forks (resp. divides) over then it contains some formula that forks (resp. divides) over. (b) If π( x) is a consistent type over then π( x) does not divide over. Nondividing and nonforking are used to define ternary relations on small subsets of M, given by (1) A d B if and only if tp(a/b) does not divide over, (2) A f B if and only if tp(a/b) does not fork over. These relations were originally defined to abstractly capture notions of independence and dimension in stable theories, and have been found to still be meaning ful in more complicated theories as well. In particular, we will consider the interpretation of these notions in the unstable theories of certain homogeneous graphs. 3. Graphs Recall that a countable graph G is universal if any countable graph is isomorphic to aninduced subgraphofg; and Gis homogenousif anygraphisomorphism between finite subsets of G extends to an automorphism of G. The canonical example of such a graph is the countable random graph, i.e. the Fraïssé limit of the class of finite graphs. In [5], a new family of countable homogenous graphs was introduced: the generic K n -free graphs, for n 3, which are often
3 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS 3 called the Henson graphs. For a particular n 3, there is a unique such graph up to isomorphism. Definition 3.1. Fix n 3 and let K n be the complete graph on n vertices. The generic K n -free graph, H n, is the unique countable graph such that (i) H n is K n -free, (ii) any finite K n -free graph is isomorphic to an induced subgraph of H n, (iii) any graph isomorphism between finite subsets of H n extends to an automorphism of H n. Given n 3, H n can also be constructed as the Fraïssé limit of the clas of finite K n -free graphs. WestudygraphstructuresinthegraphlanguageL = {R},whereRisinterpreted as the binary edge relation. We consider (1) T 0, the complete theory of the random graph, (2) T n = Th(H n ), for n 3. It is a well-known fact (and a standard exercise) that each of these theories is ℵ 0 -categorical with quantifier elimination. Fix n 3 and fix H n = T n, a sufficiently saturated monster model of T n. As H n is a graph, we can embed it in a larger sufficiently saturated monster model G = T 0. Note that H n isthen asubgraphofg, but not an elementarysubstructure. Let κ(h n ) = sup{κ : H n is κ-saturated}. For the rest of the paper, n, H n, and G are fixed. By saturation, we have the following fact. Proposition 3.2. Suppose H and X G, such that X is K n -free, X, and X κ(h). Then there is a graph embedding f : X H such that f = id. The remainder of this section is devoted to specifying notation and conventions concerning the language L. First, we consider types. Definition 3.3. Suppose G, with < κ(h n ). (1) We only consider partial types π( x) such that x κ(h n ). Furthermore, we will assume types are symmetricially closed. For example if c then xrc π( x) if and only if crx π( x). (2) An R-type over is a collection π( x) of atomic and negated atomic L- formulas, none of which is of the form x i = c, where c. When we say that π( x,ȳ) is an R-type over, we will assume further that π( x,ȳ) does not contain x i = x j or y i = y j, for some i j. (3) Suppose π( x) is an R-type over. An optimal solution of π( x) is a tuple ā = π( x) such that (i) a i a j for all i j and a i for all i, (ii) a i Ra j if and only if x i Rx j π( x), (iii) given c, a i Rc if and only if x i Rc π( x). We will frequently use the following fact, which says that we can always find optimal solutions of R-types. Proposition 3.4. Suppose H n and π( x) is an R-type over. (a) π( x) is consistent with T 0 if and only if it has an optimal solution in G. (b) π( x) is consistent with T n if and only if it has an optimal solution in H n.
4 4 GABRIEL ONANT This is a straightforward exercise, which we leave to the reader. The idea is that a type cannot prove than an edge exists in a graph, without explicitly saying so. Moreover, removing extra edges to optimize the solution of a consistent type is always possible and, in the case of T n, will not conflict with the requirement that the solution be K n -free. Next, we specify notation and conventions concerning L-formulas. Definition 3.5. Suppose G. (1) Let L 0 () be the collection of conjunctions of atomic and negated atomic L-formulas, with parameters from, such that no conjunct is of the form x = c, where x is a variable and c. When we write ϕ( x,ȳ) L 0 (), we will assume further that no conjunct of ϕ( x,ȳ) is of the form x i = x j or y i = y j, for some i j. (2) Given ϕ( x) L 0 () and θ( x), an atomic or negated atomic formula, we write ϕ( x) θ( x) if θ( x) is a conjunct of ϕ( x). (3) We will assume L 0 ()-formulas are symmetrically closed. For example ϕ( x) xrc if and only if ϕ( x) crx. (4) Let L R () be the collection of formulas ϕ( x,ȳ) L 0 () such that no conjunct is of the form x i = y j. The main result of this paper will be a characterizationofforking and dividing in T n. We will use the following characterizationof dividing in T 0, which is a standard exercise (see e.g. [9]). Fact 3.6. Fix G and ϕ( x,ȳ) L 0 (). Suppose b G\ is such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent. Then ϕ( x, b) divides over if and only if ϕ( x, b) x i = b for some b b. onsequently, if A,B, G then A d B A B. T 0 is a standard example of a simple theory, and so the previous fact is also a characterization of forking. On the other hand, T n is non-simple. Indeed, the Henson graph is a canonical example where f fails amalgamation over models (see [6]). A direct proof of this (for n = 3) can be found in [4, Example 2.11(4)]. The precise classification of T n is well-known, and summarized by the following result. Fact 3.7. T n is TP 2, SOP 3, and NSOP 4. See [2] and [8] for definitions of these properties. The proof of TP 2 can be found in [2] for n = 3. SOP 3 and NSOP 4 are demonstrated in [8] for n = 3. The generalizations of these arguments to n 3 are fairly straightforward. However, NSOP 4 for all n 3 also follows from a more general result in [7]. 4. Dividing in T n The goal of this section is to find a graph theoretic characterization of dividing independence in T n. Therefore, when we say that a partial type divides over H n, we mean with respect to the theory T n. Lemma 4.1. Suppose ( b l ) l<ω is an indiscernible sequence in H n. (a) H n = b k i Rbl i for all k < l < ω and 1 i b 0. (b) If l( b 0 ) < n 1 then l<ω b l is K n 1 free.
5 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS 5 Proof. Part (a). Suppose not. By indiscernibility, H n = b k i Rbl i for all k < l < ω. In particular, {b 1 i,...,bn i } = K n, which is a contradiction. Part (b). Suppose S B := l<ω b l with S = n 1 and, for 1 i b 0, let S i = S {b l i : l < ω}. Since l( b 0 ) < n 1, there is some i such that S i 2. By part (a), S = Kn 1. We first define a graph theoretic binary relation on disjoint graphs, which will capture the notion of dividing in T n. Definition 4.2. (1) Suppose B, H n are disjoint. Then B is n-bound to, written K n (B/), if there is B 0 B such that (i) B 0 = n and B 0 B 0 B, (ii) if u,v B 0 are distinct then urv, (iii) if u B 0 B and v B 0 then urv. We say B 0 witnesses K n (B/). Informally, B 0 witnesses K n (B/) if and only if the only thing preventing B 0 = Kn is a possible lack of edges between vertices in B. (2) Suppose ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () and b H n \ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent. Then b is ϕ-n-bound to, written K ϕ n ( b/), if there is B b, with 0 < B < n, such that (i) K n (B/), (ii) K n (B/ā) for all ā = ϕ( x, b). We say B witnesses K ϕ n( b/). The main resultofthis section(theorem 4.5)will showthat Kn ϕ is the graphtheoretic interpretation of dividing. In particular, for ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () and b H n \ with ϕ( x, b) consistent, we will show that ϕ( x, b) divides over if and only if Kn ϕ( b/). The reverse direction of the proof of this will use the following construction of a particular indiscernible sequence. onstruction 4.3. Fix H n and b H n \. We extend b to an infinite - indiscernible sequence ( b l ) l<ω, such that b l i bm j and b l i Rbm j for all l < m < ω and 1 i,j b. Note that ( b l ) l<ω is K n -free and so ( b l ) l<ω is an indiscernible sequence in H n. Given B b, we let Γ( b,b) be the graph expansion of ( b l ) l<ω obtained by adding b l i Rbm j if and only if l < m, i < j, and b i,b j B. We can embed Γ( b,b) into G over. Furthermore, if Γ( b,b) is K n -free, then we can embed Γ( b,b) in H n over. In this case, if Γ 0 ( b,b) is the image of ( b l ) l<ω, then Γ 0 ( b,b) is a -indiscernible sequence in H n. Lemma 4.4. Let H n and b H n \. Suppose ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent and K ϕ n ( b/), witnessed by B b. (a) Γ( b,b) is K n -free. (b) If Γ 0 ( b,b) = ( b l ) l<ω then {ϕ( x, b l ) : l < ω} is (n 1)-inconsistent with T n. Proof. We may consider Γ 0 ( b,b) as an indiscernible sequence in G. Part (a). Suppose K n = W Γ( b,b). Since is Kn -free, W Γ 0 ( b,b). Say W Γ 0 ( b,b) = {b l1 i 1,...,b lr i r } with l 1... l r. Note that i s i t for all 1 s < t r by Lemma 4.1. Let B 0 = {b i1,...,b ir }. Define V = (W\{b l1 i 1,...,b lr i r }) {b i1,...,b ir }.
6 6 GABRIEL ONANT If l 1 = l r then, since b l1 b, it follows that V = Kn, which is a contradiction. Therefore l 1 < l r. By construction of Γ( b,b) it follows that b i1,b ir B. If 1 s r then we either have l 1 < l s or l s < l r, and in either case it follows that b is B. Therefore r B n 1; in particular W. But then V witnesses that B is n-bound to, which is a contradiction. Therefore Γ( b,b) is K n -free. Part (b). By part (a), we may consider Γ 0 ( b,b) as in indiscernible sequence in H n. By indiscernibility, it suffices to show that the R-type π( x) = {ϕ( x, b l ) : 0 l < n 1} is inconsistent with T n. So suppose, towards a contradiction, that π( x) is consistent with T n and let ā H n be an optimal solution. Then ā = ϕ( x, b) so, by assumption, there is D Bā witnessing K n (B/ā). We have D B. Moreover, K n (B/) implies D ā. To ease notation, let D B = {b 0,...,b k } and D ā = {a 0,...,a m }. Note that k < n 1. Define A 0 = D ā and B 0 = {b 0 0,...,bk k }. We make the following observations. (1) If u,v A 0 are distinct then urv. (2) If b i i,bj j B 0 are distinct, then b i i Rbj j by construction of Γ( b,b). (3) If c A 0 and b j j B 0 then b j j Rc since b jrc and b j b. (4) If a i A 0 ā and b j j B 0 then, since ā is an optimal solution of π( x), we have a i Rb j ( ) ) ϕ( x, b) x i Rb j (ϕ( x, b j ) x i Rb j j a i Rb j j. TheseobservationsimplyA 0 B 0 = Kn,whichisacontradictionsinceA 0 B 0 H. Theorem 4.5. Let H n, ϕ( x,ȳ) L R (), and b H n \ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent. Then ϕ( x, b) divides over if and only if K ϕ n( b/). Proof. ( ): Suppose B b witnesses K ϕ n( b/). Then Γ( b,b) H n and {ϕ( x, b l ) : l < ω} is (n 1)-inconsistent by Lemma 4.4. So ϕ( x, b) divides over. ( ): Suppose ϕ( x, b) divides over. Then there is a -indiscernible sequence ( b l ) l<ω, with b 0 = b, such that {ϕ( x, b l ) : l < ω} is inconsistent. Let G = l<ω b l. onsider G as a subgraph of G, and note that ( b l ) l<ω is still -indiscernible in G. Since ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () and ϕ( x, b) is consistent (in G), it follows from 3.6 that ϕ( x, b) does not divide over in G. Therefore there is an optimal realization d G of π( x) := {ϕ( x, b l ) : l < ω}. If G d is K n - free then G d embeds in H n over G, which is a contradiction. Therefore there is K n = W G d. Note that W d since G is Kn -free. Without loss of generality, let W d = {d 1,...,d m }. Suppose, towards a contradiction, that W G. Let ā H n be a solution to ϕ( x, b). Since d is an optimal realization of π( x), we make the following observations. (1) If 1 i,j m are distinct then a i Ra j. (2) If b W G then a i Rb for all 1 i m. Therefore, K n = (W G) {a1,...,a m }, which is a contradiction, and so W (G\).
7 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS 7 Let W (G\) = {b l1 j 1,...,b l k jk } and note that 1 t < n. By Lemma 4.1, j s j t for all s t, so without loss of generality, let W (G\) = {b l1 1,...,bl k k }. Let B = {b 1,...,b k }. laim 1: K n (B/). Proof: Suppose X B witnesses K n (B/). By indiscernibility, if B 0 = {b ls s : b s B X}, then (X ) B 0 witnesses that B 0 is n-bound to. But b ls s Rb lt t for all s t, so (X ) B 0 = Kn, which is a contradiction. laim 2: If ā H n is a solution of ϕ( x, b) then K n (B/ā). Proof: We show (W ) B {a 1,...,a m } witnesses K n (B/ā), which means verifying all of the necessary relations. Recall that d is an optimal solution to π( x). (1) If 1 i j m then d i Rd j ( ) ϕ( x, b) x i Rx j ai Ra j. (2) If 1 i m and c W then d i Rc ( ϕ( x, b) x i Rc ) a i Rc. (3) If 1 i m and 1 s k then d i Rb ls s ( ) ( ) ϕ( x, b ls ) x i Rb ls s ϕ( x, b) xi Rb s ai Rb s. Together, laims 1 and 2 imply K ϕ n ( b/), as desired. We can now give the full characterization of nondividing formulas in T n, and the ternary relation d on sets, which gives the analogy of Fact 3.6 for T n. Theorem 4.6. (a) Suppose H n, ϕ( x,ȳ) L 0 (), and b H n \ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent. Then ϕ( x, b) divides over if and only if ϕ( x, b) x i = b for some b b, or ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () and Kn( b/). ϕ (b) Suppose A,B, H n. Then A d B if and only if (i) A B, and (ii) for all b B\, if K n ( b/a) then K n ( b/). Proof. Part(a) follows immediately from Theorem 4.5. For part(b), let ā enumerate A. Note that ā is an optimal solution to tp(ā/b). ( ): Suppose A d B. Then A B is immediate. For condition (ii), fix b B\ and suppose, towards a contradiction, that Kn ( b/) and K n ( b/a). Fix X A b witnessing K n ( b/a). Let 0 = X. Without loss of generality, let X A = {a 1,...,a m } and X b = b = {b 1,...,b k }. Define L R ()-formula ϕ( x,ȳ), where x i = (x 1,...,x m ), ȳ = (y 1,...,y k ), and ϕ( x,ȳ) expresses x is a complete graph and xrȳ, xr 0 and ȳr 0, 0 is a complete graph. Then Kn ϕ( b /) and ϕ( x, b ) tp(a/b). Therefore A d B by Theorem 4.5, which is a contradiction. ( ): Suppose A d B. Then there is some ϕ( x,ȳ) L 0() and b B\ such that ϕ( x, b) divides over and ϕ( x, b) tp(a/b). If ϕ( x,ȳ) x i = y j for some i,j, then a i = b j (A B)\ and (i) fails. Otherwise, ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () and Kn( b/). ϕ It follows that K n ( b/) and K n ( b/a), so (ii) fails. The theorem translates the model theoretic notion of dividing to the graph theoretic notion K ϕ n( b/). Although the definition of K ϕ n( b/) implies that we must check all solutions of ϕ, it suffices to check an optimal one.
8 8 GABRIEL ONANT orollary 4.7. Let H n, ϕ( x,ȳ) L R (), and b H n \ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent. Let ā be an optimal solution. Then ϕ( x, b) divides over if and only if there is B b such that K n (B/) and K n (B/ā). Proof. By Theorem 4.5, we need to show K ϕ n( b/) if and only if there is B b such that K n (B/) and K n (B/ā). The forward direction is clear. onversely, suppose B b such that K n (B/) and K n (B/ā). Let d be any solution to ϕ( x, b). We want to show K n (B/ d). Let B 0 Bā witness K n (B/ā). Define 0 = (B 0 ) and D = {d i : a i B 0 ā}. Since ā is optimal, we can make the following observations to show that B 0 0 D witnesses K n (B/ d). (1) If c 1,c 2 0 then c 1 Rc 2 by assumption. (2) If c 0 and d i D then a i Rc ( ϕ( x, b) x i Rc ) d i Rc. (3) If c 0 and b B 0 then brc by assumption. (4) If d i D and b B 0 then a i Rb ( ϕ( x, b) x i Rb ) d i Rb. We end this section by giving some examples and traits of dividing formulas in T n. We will begin using the following notation. If A and B are sets we write ARB to mean arb for all a A and b B. On other hand, A RB means arb for all a A and b B. orollary 4.8. Suppose H n and b 1,...,b n 1 H n \ are distinct. Then the formula ϕ(x, b) := divides over if and only if K n ( b/). n 1 i=1 xrb i Proof. First, if b = K n 1 then ϕ(x, b) is inconsistent and thus divides over. Furthermore, in this case K n ( b/) since, if so, then there is some c such that cr b and so c b = K n. Therefore we may assume b = Kn 1. ( ): If ϕ(x, b) divides over then, by Theorem 4.5, there is some B b such that K n (B/) and K n (B/a) for any a = ϕ(x, b). Let a = ϕ(x, b) such that a R. Let X Ba witness K n (B/a). Then K n (B/) implies a X, and so X = since a R. Therefore X Ba ba, X = n, and b = n 1. It follows that B = b, and so K n ( b/). ( ): Note that if a realizes ϕ(x, b), then K n ( b/a). So if K n ( b/) then b itself witnesses Kn( b/). ϕ By Theorem 4.5, ϕ(x, b) divides over. orollary 4.9. Let H and ϕ( x,ȳ) L R () such that ϕ( x,ȳ) x i Ry j for all i,j. If b H\ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent, then ϕ( x, b) does not divide over. Proof. Suppose B b is such that K n (B/). Let ā be an optimal solution to ϕ( x, b). Then ā RB, so K n (B/ā). By orollary 4.7, ϕ( x, b) does not divide over. orollary Let H and ϕ( x,ȳ) L R (). Suppose b H\ such that ϕ( x, b) is consistent and divides over. Define R ϕ = {b b : ϕ( x, b) x i Rb for some i} {x i : ϕ( x, b) x i Rb for some b b}. Then R ϕ n and b R ϕ > 1.
9 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS 9 Proof. By assumption, we have Kn ϕ( b/). If ā is an optimal solution of ϕ( x, b) then there is some X bā witnessing K n ( b/ā). Note that X ā since K n ( b/). Set B = (X b) {x i : a i X}. Then B n and B R ϕ since ā is optimal. Finally, b B = b X > 1, since otherwise X = K n. orollary4.10saysthat ifaformulafroml R () dividesthen it needs to mention edges between at least n vertices (and more than one parameter). This is not surprising since no consistent formula from L R () will divide in T 0, and so dividing in T n should come from the creation of a graph that is too close to K n. 5. Forking for complete types In this section, we use our characterization of d in T n to show that forking and dividing are the same for complete types. The proof takes two steps, the first of which is to prove full existence for the following ternary relation on graphs. We take the following definition from [1]. Definition 5.1. Given A,B, H n, define edge independence by A R B A B and there is no edge from A\ to B\. Lemma 5.2. For all A,B, H n there is A A such that A R B. Proof. Fix A,B, H n and enumerate A\(B) = (a i ) i<λ. We define a graph G = B(a i ) i<λ G, where each a i is a new vertex, and (i) for all i,j < λ, a i Ra j if and only if a ira j, (ii) for all i < λ and c, a i Rc if and only if a irc, (iii) for all i < λ and b B\, a i Rb. We claim that G is K n -free. Indeed, if K n = W G then, by (iii), it follows that W B or W (a i ) i<λ. But B H n so this means W (a i ) i<λ, which, by (i) and (ii), means A is not K n -free, a contradiction. Therefore G embeds in H n over B. Let (a ) i<λ be the image of (a i ) i<λ and set A = (A ) (a i ) i<λ. Then it is clear that A A and A R B. Using full existence of R, we can prove the full characterization of forking and dividing in T n. Theorem 5.3. Suppose A,B, H n. Then A f B A d B A B and, for all b B\, K n ( b/a) implies K n ( b/). Proof. The second equivalence is by Theorem 4.6; and dividing implies forking in any theory. Therefore we only need to show A d B implies A f B. Suppose A f B. Then there is some D H n\b such that A d BD for any A B A. By Lemma 5.2, let A B A such that A R D. By assumption, we have B A d BD. ase 1: A BD. We have A BD B by assumption, so this means there is b (A B)\. But A B A and so b (A B)\. Therefore A d B, as desired. ase 2: A BD. Then, since A d BD, it follows from Theorem 4.6 that there is b BD\ such that K n ( b/) and K n ( b/a ). Let X A b witness
10 10 GABRIEL ONANT K n ( b/a ). Note that X A BD. Moreover, note also that if X (A \B), then X BD, and so X witnesses K n ( b/), which is a contradiction. Therefore X (A \B). Then we claim that X A B. Indeed, otherwise there is u X (A \B) and v X (D\A B). Therefore u v, u A, and v b, and so urv, since X witnesses K n ( b/a ). But this contradicts that there is no edge from A \B to D\B. So we have X A B. Let b = X b B\. Then K n ( b/) implies K n ( b /), and X witnesses K n ( b /A). Therefore A d B. Since A B A, we have A d B, as desired. It is a generalfact that if d = f in some theory T, then all sets are extension basesfornonforking. Indeed, ifapartialtypeforksover thenitcanbeextendedto a complete type that forks(and therefore divides over ). Therefore, by Proposition 2.2(b), no partial type forks over its own set of parameters. 6. A forking and nondividing formula in T n We have shown that forking and dividing are the same for complete types in T n. In this section, we show that the same result cannot be obtained for partial types, by demonstrating an example of a formula in T n that forks, but does not divide. Lemma 6.1. Suppose ( b l ) l<ω is an indiscernible sequence in G such that l( b 0 ) = 4 and b 0 is K 2 -free (no edges). Then either there are i < j such that {b l i,bl j : l < ω} is K 2 -free, or l<ω b l is not K 3 -free. Proof. Let B = l<ω b l. Suppose first that for all i < j, we have b 0 i Rb1 j or b1 i Rb0 j. Let f : {(i,j) : 1 i < j 4} {0,1} such that f(i,j) = 0 b 0 i Rb1 j. laim: If B is K 3 -free then for all i < j < k, f(i,j) = f(j,k). Proof: Suppose not. ase 1: f(i,j) = 1 and f(j,k) = 0. If f(i,k) = 0 then by indiscernibility we have b 1 i Rb0 j, b0 j Rb2 k and b1 i Rb2 k ; and so {b1 i,b0 j,b2 k } = K 3. If f(i,k) = 1 then by indiscernibility we have b 2 i Rb0 j, b0 j Rb1 k and b2 i Rb1 k ; and so {b2 i,b0 j,b1 k } = K 3. ase 2: f(i,j) = 0andf(j,k) = 1. Iff(i,k) = 0then{b 0 i,b2 j,b1 k } = K 3. Otherwise, if f(i,k) = 1 then {b 1 i,b2 j,b0 k } = K 3. By the claim, if f(1,2) = 0 then f(2,3), f(3,4), f(1,3) and f(2,4) are all 0; and so {b 0 1,b1 2,b2 3 } = K 3. If f(1,2) = 1 then f(2,3), f(3,4), f(1,3), and f(2,4) are all 1; and so {b 2 1,b 1 2,b 0 3} = K 3. In any case we have shown that B is not K 3 -free. So we may assume that there is some i < j such that b 0 i Rb1 j and b1 i Rb0 j. By indiscernibility, and since b 0 i Rb0 j, it follows that {bl i,bl j : l < ω} is K 2-free. Theorem 6.2. Let, b = (b 1,b 2,b 3,b 4 ) H n such that = K n 3, br, and b is K 2 -free. For i < j, let ϕ i,j (x,b j,b j ) = xrb i b j. Set ϕ(x, b) = i<j ϕ i,j(x,b i,b j ). Then ϕ(x, b) forks over but does not divide over. Proof. For any i j, b i b j = n 1, and so K n (b i,b j /). Moreover, we clearly have that if a = ϕ(x,b i,b j ) then K n (b i,b j /a). By Theorem 4.5, ϕ i,j (x,b i,b j ) divides over, and therefore ϕ(x, b) forks over. Let ( b l ) l<ω be -indiscernible, with b 0 = b. If there is some K 3 = W l<ω b l then K n = W, since bl b for all l < ω implies RW. Therefore l<ω b l is
11 FORKING AND DIVIDING IN HENSON GRAPHS 11 K 3 -free and so, by Lemma 6.1, there are i < j such that B := {b l i,bl j : l < ω} is K 2- free. Since = n 3, it follows that B is K n 1 -free and so there is some a H such that ar(b). But then a = {ϕ i,j (x,b l i,bl j ) : l < ω} {ϕ(x, b l ) : l < ω}. By Theorem 2.2, ϕ(x, b) does not divide over A. 7. Final remarks We have shown that T n is an NSOP 4 theory in which all sets are extension bases for nonforking, but forking and dividing are not always the same. This only partially answers the question of how the results of [3] extend to theories with TP 2. Inpartictular, forkingis the sameasdividingforcomplete types int n, which means there is good behavior of nonforking beyond just the fact that all sets are extension bases. This leads to the following amended version of the main question. Question 7.1. Suppose that in some theory all sets are extension bases for nonforking. (1) Does NSOP 3 imply forking and dividing are the same for partial types? (2) For what classes of theories do we have f = d? References [1] Hans Adler, A geometric introduction to forking and thorn-forking, J. Math. Log. 9 (2009), no. 1, MR (2011i:03026) [2] Artem hernikov, Theories without the tree property of the second kind, arxiv: v3 [math.lo], [3] Artem hernikov and Itay Kaplan, Forking and dividing in NTP 2 theories, J. Symbolic Logic 77 (2012), no. 1, MR [4] Bradd Hart, Stability theory and its variants, Model theory, algebra, and geometry, Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., vol. 39, ambridge Univ. Press, ambridge, 2000, pp MR (2001h:03058) [5]. Ward Henson, A family of countable homogeneous graphs, Pacific J. Math. 38 (1971), MR (46 #3377) [6] Byunghan Kim and Anand Pillay, Simple theories, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 88 (1997), no. 2-3, , Joint AILA-KGS Model Theory Meeting (Florence, 1995). MR (99b:03049) [7] Rehana Patel, A family of countably universal graphs without SOP 4, preprint, [8] Saharon Shelah, Toward classifying unstable theories, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 80 (1996), no. 3, MR (97e:03052) [9] Katrin Tent and Martin Ziegler, A course in model theory, Lecture Notes in Logic, vol. 40, Association for Symbolic Logic, La Jolla, A, MR Department of Mathematics, Statistics and omputer Science, University of Illinois at hicago, hicago, IL, 60607, USA address: gconan2@uic.edu
Forking and Dividing in Random Graphs
Forking and Dividing in Random Graphs Gabriel Conant UIC Graduate Student Conference in Logic University of Notre Dame April 28-29, 2012 Gabriel Conant (UIC) Forking and Dividing in Random Graphs April
More informationProperly forking formulas in Urysohn spaces
Properly forking formulas in Urysohn spaces Gabriel Conant University of Notre Dame gconant@nd.edu March 4, 2016 Abstract In this informal note, we demonstrate the existence of forking and nondividing
More informationModel Theory and Forking Independence
Model Theory and Forking Independence Gabriel Conant UIC UIC Graduate Student Colloquium April 22, 2013 Gabriel Conant (UIC) Model Theory and Forking Independence April 22, 2013 1 / 24 Types We fix a first
More informationStrong theories, burden, and weight
Strong theories, burden, and weight Hans Adler 13th March 2007 Abstract We introduce the notion of the burden of a partial type in a complete first-order theory and call a theory strong if all types have
More informationOn Kim-independence in NSOP 1 theories
On Kim-independence in NSOP 1 theories Itay Kaplan, HUJI Joint works with Nick Ramsey, Nick Ramsey and Saharon Shelah 06/07/2017, Model Theory, Będlewo, Poland 2/20 NSOP 1 Definition The formula ϕ(x; y)
More informationStable embeddedness and N IP
Stable embeddedness and N IP arxiv:1001.0515v1 [math.lo] 4 Jan 2010 Anand Pillay University of Leeds January 4, 2010 Abstract We give some sufficient conditions for a predicate P in a complete theory T
More informationStable embeddedness and N IP
Stable embeddedness and N IP Anand Pillay University of Leeds January 14, 2010 Abstract We give some sufficient conditions for a predicate P in a complete theory T to be stably embedded. Let P be P with
More informationModel Theory and Combinatorics of Homogeneous Metric Spaces
Model Theory and Combinatorics of Homogeneous Metric Spaces by Gabriel Conant B.A. (Colgate University) 2008 M.S. (University of Illinois at Chicago) 2010 Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
More informationLECTURE NOTES ON FORKING
LECTURE NOTES ON FORKING ARTEM CHERNIKOV Part 1. Preliminaries, model-theoretic notions of smallness, preindependence relations 1. Lecture 1 1.1. Types. Most of the time we fix a complete countable first-order
More informationDisjoint n-amalgamation
October 13, 2015 Varieties of background theme: the role of infinitary logic Goals 1 study n- toward 1 existence/ of atomic models in uncountable cardinals. 2 0-1-laws 2 History, aec, and Neo-stability
More informationWeight and measure in NIP theories
Weight and measure in NIP theories Anand Pillay University of Leeds September 18, 2011 Abstract We initiate an account of Shelah s notion of strong dependence in terms of generically stable measures, proving
More informationMarch 3, The large and small in model theory: What are the amalgamation spectra of. infinitary classes? John T. Baldwin
large and large and March 3, 2015 Characterizing cardinals by L ω1,ω large and L ω1,ω satisfies downward Lowenheim Skolem to ℵ 0 for sentences. It does not satisfy upward Lowenheim Skolem. Definition sentence
More informationω-stable Theories: Introduction
ω-stable Theories: Introduction 1 ω - Stable/Totally Transcendental Theories Throughout let T be a complete theory in a countable language L having infinite models. For an L-structure M and A M let Sn
More informationTame definable topological dynamics
Tame definable topological dynamics Artem Chernikov (Paris 7) Géométrie et Théorie des Modèles, 4 Oct 2013, ENS, Paris Joint work with Pierre Simon, continues previous work with Anand Pillay and Pierre
More informationarxiv:math.lo/ v1 28 Nov 2004
HILBERT SPACES WITH GENERIC GROUPS OF AUTOMORPHISMS arxiv:math.lo/0411625 v1 28 Nov 2004 ALEXANDER BERENSTEIN Abstract. Let G be a countable group. We proof that there is a model companion for the approximate
More informationMore on invariant types in NIP theories
More on invariant types in NIP theories Pierre Simon June 22, 2013 This note is not intended for publication in its present form. I wrote it to be used as a reference for other papers (mainly [CPS13])
More informationMekler s construction and generalized stability
Mekler s construction and generalized stability Artem Chernikov UCLA Automorphism Groups, Differential Galois Theory and Model Theory Barcelona, June 26, 2017 Joint work with Nadja Hempel (UCLA). Mekler
More informationI-Indexed Indiscernible Sets and Trees
1 / 20 I-Indexed Indiscernible Sets and Trees Lynn Scow Vassar College Harvard/MIT Logic Seminar December 3, 2013 2 / 20 Outline 1 background 2 the modeling property 3 a dictionary theorem 3 / 20 order
More informationAMS regional meeting Bloomington, IN April 1, 2017
Joint work with: W. Boney, S. Friedman, C. Laskowski, M. Koerwien, S. Shelah, I. Souldatos University of Illinois at Chicago AMS regional meeting Bloomington, IN April 1, 2017 Cantor s Middle Attic Uncountable
More informationStability Theory and its Variants
Model Theory, Algebra, and Geometry MSRI Publications Volume 39, 2000 Stability Theory and its Variants BRADD HART Abstract. Dimension theory plays a crucial technical role in stability theory and its
More informationA New Spectrum of Recursive Models Using An Amalgamation Construction
A New Spectrum of Recursive Models Using An Amalgamation Construction Uri Andrews September 1, 2010 Abstract We employ an infinite-signature Hrushovski amalgamation construction to yield two results in
More informationA Hanf number for saturation and omission: the superstable case
A Hanf number for saturation and omission: the superstable case John T. Baldwin University of Illinois at Chicago Saharon Shelah The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Rutgers University April 29, 2013 Abstract
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.lo] 3 Nov 2011
ON OMEGA-CATEGORICAL SIMPLE THEORIES arxiv:1102.3631v2 [math.lo] 3 Nov 2011 DANIEL PALACÍN Abstract. In the present paper we shall prove that countable ω-categorical simple CM-trivial theories and countable
More informationON VC-MINIMAL THEORIES AND VARIANTS. 1. Introduction
ON VC-MINIMAL THEORIES AND VARIANTS VINCENT GUINGONA AND MICHAEL C. LASKOWSKI Abstract. In this paper, we study VC-minimal theories and explore related concepts. We first define the notion of convex orderablity
More informationClassifying classes of structures in model theory
Classifying classes of structures in model theory Saharon Shelah The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, and Rutgers University, NJ, USA ECM 2012 Saharon Shelah (HUJI and Rutgers) Classifying classes
More informationTHE CHARACTERISTIC SEQUENCE OF A FIRST-ORDER FORMULA
THE CHARACTERISTIC SEQUENCE OF A FIRST-ORDER FORMULA M. E. MALLIARIS Abstract. For a first-order formula ϕ(x; y) we introduce and study the characteristic sequence P n : n < ω of hypergraphs defined by
More informationTRANSFERING SATURATION, THE FINITE COVER PROPERTY, AND STABILITY
TRANSFERING SATURATION, THE FINITE COVER PROPERTY, AND STABILITY John T. Baldwin Department of Mathematics University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago, IL 60680 Rami Grossberg Department of Mathematics Carnegie
More informationSimple homogeneous structures
Department of Mathematics Uppsala University Logic Colloquium, 3-8 August 2015, Helsinki Introduction Homogeneous structures have interesting properties from a model theoretic point of view. They also
More informationIntroduction. Itaï Ben-Yaacov C. Ward Henson. September American Institute of Mathematics Workshop. Continuous logic Continuous model theory
Itaï Ben-Yaacov C. Ward Henson American Institute of Mathematics Workshop September 2006 Outline Continuous logic 1 Continuous logic 2 The metric on S n (T ) Origins Continuous logic Many classes of (complete)
More informationINTRODUCTION TO GEOMETRIC STABILITY
INTRODUCTION TO GEOMETRIC STABILITY ARTEM CHERNIKOV Lecture notes for the IMS Graduate Summer School in Logic, National University of Singapore, Jun 2017. The material is based on a number of sources including:
More informationMore Model Theory Notes
More Model Theory Notes Miscellaneous information, loosely organized. 1. Kinds of Models A countable homogeneous model M is one such that, for any partial elementary map f : A M with A M finite, and any
More informationMINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP FOR DEPENDENT THEORIES
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 136, Number 3, March 2008, Pages 1087 1091 S 0002-9939(07)08654-6 Article electronically published on November 9, 2007 MINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP
More informationGENERALIZED AMALGAMATION IN SIMPLE THEORIES AND CHARACTERIZATION OF DEPENDENCE IN NON-ELEMENTARY CLASSES
GENERALIZED AMALGAMATION IN SIMPLE THEORIES AND CHARACTERIZATION OF DEPENDENCE IN NON-ELEMENTARY CLASSES By Alexei Kolesnikov Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
More informationARTEM CHERNIKOV AND SERGEI STARCHENKO
A NOTE ON THE ERDŐS-HAJNAL PROPERTY FOR STABLE GRAPHS arxiv:1504.08252v2 [math.lo] 11 Apr 2016 ARTEM CHERNIKOV AND SERGEI STARCHENKO Abstract. In this short note we provide a relatively simple proof of
More informationMeasures in model theory
Measures in model theory Anand Pillay University of Leeds Logic and Set Theory, Chennai, August 2010 Introduction I I will discuss the growing use and role of measures in pure model theory, with an emphasis
More informationIntroduction to Model Theory
Introduction to Model Theory Charles Steinhorn, Vassar College Katrin Tent, University of Münster CIRM, January 8, 2018 The three lectures Introduction to basic model theory Focus on Definability More
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.lo] 16 Oct 2015
CATEGORICITY AND INFINITARY LOGICS arxiv:1508.03316v2 [math.lo] 16 Oct 2015 WILL BONEY AND SEBASTIEN VASEY Abstract. We point out a gap in Shelah s proof of the following result: Claim 0.1. Let K be an
More informationWhat is the right type-space? Humboldt University. July 5, John T. Baldwin. Which Stone Space? July 5, Tameness.
Goals The fundamental notion of a Stone space is delicate for infinitary logic. I will describe several possibilities. There will be a quiz. Infinitary Logic and Omitting Types Key Insight (Chang, Lopez-Escobar)
More informationContinuum Harvard. April 11, Constructing Borel Models in the. Continuum Harvard. John T. Baldwin. University of Illinois at Chicago
April 11, 2013 Today s Topics 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pseudo-minimal 7 Further Applications Section 1: { Models in L ω1,ω L ω1,ω satisfies downward Löwenheim Skolem to ℵ 0 for sentences. It does not satisfy upward
More informationOctober 12, Complexity and Absoluteness in L ω1,ω. John T. Baldwin. Measuring complexity. Complexity of. concepts. to first order.
October 12, 2010 Sacks Dicta... the central notions of model theory are absolute absoluteness, unlike cardinality, is a logical concept. That is why model theory does not founder on that rock of undecidability,
More informationApplications of model theory in extremal graph combinatorics
Applications of model theory in extremal graph combinatorics Artem Chernikov (IMJ-PRG, UCLA) Logic Colloquium Helsinki, August 4, 2015 Szemerédi regularity lemma Theorem [E. Szemerédi, 1975] Every large
More informationtp(c/a) tp(c/ab) T h(m M ) is assumed in the background.
Model Theory II. 80824 22.10.2006-22.01-2007 (not: 17.12) Time: The first meeting will be on SUNDAY, OCT. 22, 10-12, room 209. We will try to make this time change permanent. Please write ehud@math.huji.ac.il
More informationHrushovski s Fusion. A. Baudisch, A. Martin-Pizarro, M. Ziegler March 4, 2007
Hrushovski s Fusion A. Baudisch, A. Martin-Pizarro, M. Ziegler March 4, 2007 Abstract We present a detailed and simplified exposition of Hrushovki s fusion of two strongly minimal theories. 1 Introduction
More informationModel-theoretic distality and incidence combinatorics
Model-theoretic distality and incidence combinatorics Artem Chernikov UCLA Model Theory and Combinatorics workshop IHP, Paris, France Jan 29, 2018 Intro I will discuss generalizations of various results
More informationMorley s Proof. Winnipeg June 3, 2007
Modern Model Theory Begins Theorem (Morley 1965) If a countable first order theory is categorical in one uncountable cardinal it is categorical in all uncountable cardinals. Outline 1 2 3 SELF-CONSCIOUS
More informationAmalgamation and the finite model property
Amalgamation and the finite model property Alex Kruckman University of California, Berkeley March 25, 2015 Alex Kruckman (UC Berkeley) Amalgamation and the FMP March 25, 2015 1 / 16 The motivating phenomenon
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO GEOMETRIC STABILITY THEORY
AN INTRODUCTION TO GEOMETRIC STABILITY THEORY SALMAN SIDDIQI Abstract. In this paper, we will introduce some of the most basic concepts in geometric stability theory, and attempt to state a dichotomy theorem
More informationA MODEL-THEORETIC PROOF OF HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ
A MODEL-THEORETIC PROOF OF HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ NICOLAS FORD Abstract. The goal of this paper is to present a proof of the Nullstellensatz using tools from a branch of logic called model theory. In
More informationarxiv: v3 [math.lo] 1 Oct 2014
ON SETS WITH RANK ONE IN SIMPLE HOMOGENEOUS STRUCTURES OVE AHLMAN AND VERA KOPONEN arxiv:1403.3079v3 [math.lo] 1 Oct 2014 Abstract. We study definable sets D of SU-rank 1 in M eq, where M is a countable
More informationCharacterizing First Order Logic
Characterizing First Order Logic Jared Holshouser, Originally by Lindstrom September 16, 2014 We are following the presentation of Chang and Keisler. 1 A Brief Review of First Order Logic Definition 1.
More informationComputability theory and uncountable structures
Sets and Computations, April 17 2015 Joint with Greg Igusa, Julia Knight and Antonio Montalbán Table of Contents 1 Generically presentable structures 2 3 1 Generically presentable structures 2 3 What phenomena
More informationDisjoint amalgamation in locally finite AEC
Disjoint amalgamation in locally finite AEC John T. Baldwin University of Illinois at Chicago Martin Koerwien KGRC April 20, 2016 Michael C. Laskowski University of Maryland Abstract We introduce the concept
More informationLocal Homogeneity. June 17, 2004
Local Homogeneity Bektur Baizhanov Institute for Informatics and Control Almaty, Kazakhstan John T. Baldwin Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science University of Illinois at Chicago
More informationTHORN-FORKING AS LOCAL FORKING
THORN-FORKING AS LOAL FORKING HANS ADLER 13th February 2007 We introduce the notion of a preindependence relation between subsets of the big model of a complete first-order theory, an abstraction of the
More informationForking and dividing in dependent theories
Forking and dividing in dependent theories (and NTP 2 in there) Artem Chernikov 1 joint work with Itay Kaplan 2 1 Humboldt Universität zu Berlin / Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 2 Hebrew University of
More informationA trichotomy of countable, stable, unsuperstable theories
A trichotomy of countable, stable, unsuperstable theories Michael C. Laskowski Department of Mathematics University of Maryland S. Shelah Department of Mathematics Hebrew University of Jerusalem Department
More informationCOHEIR IN AVERAGEABLE CLASSES
OHEIR IN AVERAGEABLE LASSES WILL BONEY This document serves as a supplement to Boney [Bon, Section 3], in particular to provide the details to Proposition 3.6. Familiarity with that paper and Boney and
More informationA computably stable structure with no Scott family of finitary formulas
A computably stable structure with no Scott family of finitary formulas Peter Cholak Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame Richard A. Shore Department of Mathematics, Cornell University Reed
More informationAnnals of Pure and Applied Logic
Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 161 (2010) 944 955 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Annals of Pure and Applied Logic journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apal Types directed by constants
More informationAlmost Galois ω-stable classes
Almost Galois ω-stable classes John T. Baldwin Paul B. Larson Saharon Shelah March 11, 2015 Abstract Theorem. Suppose that k = (K, k ) is an ℵ 0-presentable abstract elementary class with Löwenheim-Skolem
More informationForcing and Group Theory
Senior Thesis Forcing and Group Theory Submitted to the Department of Mathematics on 15 April 2013 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors Senior Thesis. A. James Schmidt
More informationVAUGHT S THEOREM: THE FINITE SPECTRUM OF COMPLETE THEORIES IN ℵ 0. Contents
VAUGHT S THEOREM: THE FINITE SPECTRUM OF COMPLETE THEORIES IN ℵ 0 BENJAMIN LEDEAUX Abstract. This expository paper introduces model theory with a focus on countable models of complete theories. Vaught
More informationStrict orders prohibit elimination of hyperimaginaries
Strict orders prohibit elimination of hyperimaginaries Hans Adler Leeds University 3 November 2008 Part I A non-eliminable infinitary hyperimaginary Imaginaries Imaginaries: ā/e where ā is a (finite) tuple
More informationLöwenheim-Skolem Theorems, Countable Approximations, and L ω. David W. Kueker (Lecture Notes, Fall 2007)
Löwenheim-Skolem Theorems, Countable Approximations, and L ω 0. Introduction David W. Kueker (Lecture Notes, Fall 2007) In its simplest form the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem for L ω1 ω states that if σ L ω1
More informationQualifying Exam Logic August 2005
Instructions: Qualifying Exam Logic August 2005 If you signed up for Computability Theory, do two E and two C problems. If you signed up for Model Theory, do two E and two M problems. If you signed up
More informationPartial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions
Partial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions Sergei Ovchinnikov San Francisco State University, Mathematics Department, 1600 Holloway Ave., San Francisco, CA 94132 Abstract Partial cubes
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.lo] 12 Feb 2018
LOCAL CHARACTER OF KI-INDEPENDENCE ITAY KAPLAN, NICHOLAS RASEY, AND SAHARON SHELAH arxiv:1707.02902v2 [math.lo] 12 Feb 2018 Abstract. We show that NSOP 1 theories are exactly the theories in which Kim-independence
More informationVC-DENSITY FOR TREES
VC-DENSITY FOR TREES ANTON BOBKOV Abstract. We show that for the theory of infinite trees we have vc(n) = n for all n. VC density was introduced in [1] by Aschenbrenner, Dolich, Haskell, MacPherson, and
More informationA DISCUSSION OF KEISLER S ORDER
A DISCUSSION OF KEISLER S ORDER ADELE PADGETT Abstract. In model theory, the complex numbers as an algebraically closed field are often given as an example of a simple, well-behaved mathematical structure,
More informationIntroduction to Model Theory
Introduction to Model Theory Jouko Väänänen 1,2 1 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Helsinki 2 Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam Beijing, June
More informationDefinably amenable groups in NIP
Definably amenable groups in NIP Artem Chernikov (Paris 7) Lyon, 21 Nov 2013 Joint work with Pierre Simon. Setting T is a complete first-order theory in a language L, countable for simplicity. M = T a
More informationChapter VI. Relations. Assumptions are the termites of relationships. Henry Winkler
Chapter VI Relations Assumptions are the termites of relationships. Henry Winkler Studying relationships between objects can yield important information about the objects themselves. In the real numbers,
More informationAn exposition of Hrushovski s New Strongly Minimal Set
An exposition of Hrushovski s New Strongly Minimal Set Martin Ziegler Barcelona, July 2011 In [5] E. Hrushovski proved the following theorem: Theorem 0.1 (Hrushovski s New Strongly Minimal Set). There
More informationFields and model-theoretic classification, 2
Fields and model-theoretic classification, 2 Artem Chernikov UCLA Model Theory conference Stellenbosch, South Africa, Jan 11 2017 NIP Definition Let T be a complete first-order theory in a language L.
More informationCHAINS OF SATURATED MODELS IN AECS
CHAINS OF SATURATED ODELS IN AECS WILL BONEY AND SEBASTIEN VASEY Abstract. We study when a union of saturated models is saturated in the framework of tame abstract elementary classes (AECs) with amalgamation.
More informationFINITE MODEL THEORY (MATH 285D, UCLA, WINTER 2017) LECTURE NOTES IN PROGRESS
FINITE MODEL THEORY (MATH 285D, UCLA, WINTER 2017) LECTURE NOTES IN PROGRESS ARTEM CHERNIKOV 1. Intro Motivated by connections with computational complexity (mostly a part of computer scientice today).
More informationA CONVERSATION BETWEEN MODEL THEORY AND GRAPH THEORY
A CONVERSATION BETWEEN MODEL THEORY AND GRAPH THEORY ISABELLA SCOTT Abstract. In general terms, Ramsey Theory studies the properties of structures that are preserved under taking partitions, and covers
More informationLADDER INDEX OF GROUPS. Kazuhiro ISHIKAWA, Hiroshi TANAKA and Katsumi TANAKA
Math. J. Okayama Univ. 44(2002), 37 41 LADDER INDEX OF GROUPS Kazuhiro ISHIKAWA, Hiroshi TANAKA and Katsumi TANAKA 1. Stability In 1969, Shelah distinguished stable and unstable theory in [S]. He introduced
More informationAlgebraic closure in continuous logic
Revista Colombiana de Matemáticas Volumen 41 (2007), páginas 279 285 Algebraic closure in continuous logic C. Ward Henson Hernando Tellez University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA Abstract. We study
More informationTROPICAL SCHEME THEORY
TROPICAL SCHEME THEORY 5. Commutative algebra over idempotent semirings II Quotients of semirings When we work with rings, a quotient object is specified by an ideal. When dealing with semirings (and lattices),
More informationTHE FREE ROOTS OF THE COMPLETE GRAPH
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 132, Number 5, Pages 1543 1548 S 0002-9939(03)07193-4 Article electronically published on October 2, 2003 THE FREE ROOTS OF THE COMPLETE GRAPH ENRIQUE
More informationINDEPENDENCE RELATIONS IN RANDOMIZATIONS
INDEPENDENE RELATIONS IN RANDOMIZATIONS URI ANDREWS, ISAA GOLDBRING, AND H. JEROME KEISLER Abstract. The randomization of a complete first order theory T is the complete continuous theory T R with two
More informationMODEL THEORY OF GROUPS (MATH 223M, UCLA, SPRING 2018)
MODEL THEORY OF GROUPS (MATH 223M, UCLA, SPRING 2018) ARTEM CHERNIKOV Lecture notes in progress. All comments and corrections are very welcome. Last update: May 21, 2018 Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1.
More informationThe nite submodel property and ω-categorical expansions of pregeometries
The nite submodel property and ω-categorical expansions of pregeometries Marko Djordjevi bstract We prove, by a probabilistic argument, that a class of ω-categorical structures, on which algebraic closure
More informationA Pigeonhole Property for Relational Structures
~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ Math. Log. Quart. 45 (1999) 3, 409-413 Mathematical Logic Quarterly @ WILEY-VCH Verlag Berlin GmbH 1999 A Pigeonhole Property for Relational Structures Anthony Bonatoa and Dejan Deli6 ') a
More informationGOOD FRAMES IN THE HART-SHELAH EXAMPLE
GOOD FRAMES IN THE HART-SHELAH EXAMPLE WILL BONEY AND SEBASTIEN VASEY Abstract. For a fixed natural number n 1, the Hart-Shelah example is an abstract elementary class (AEC) with amalgamation that is categorical
More informationCS632 Notes on Relational Query Languages I
CS632 Notes on Relational Query Languages I A. Demers 6 Feb 2003 1 Introduction Here we define relations, and introduce our notational conventions, which are taken almost directly from [AD93]. We begin
More informationDIVIDING AND WEAK QUASI-DIMENSIONS IN ARBITRARY THEORIES
DIVIDING AND WEAK QUASI-DIMENSIONS IN ARBITRARY THEORIES ISAAC GODBRING AND HENRY TOWSNER Abstract. We show that any countable model of a model complete theory has an elementary extension with a pseudofinite-like
More informationAutomorphism Groups of Homogeneous Structures
Automorphism Groups of Homogeneous Structures Andrés Villaveces - Universidad Nacional de Colombia - Bogotá Arctic Set Theory Workshop 3 - Kilpisjärvi - January 2017 Contents Reconstructing models The
More informationINTERPRETING HASSON S EXAMPLE
INTERPRETING HASSON S EXAMPLE CHARLES K. SMART Abstract. We generalize Ziegler s fusion result [8] by relaxing the definability of degree requirement. As an application, we show that an example proposed
More informationCOMPUTING AND DOMINATING THE RYLL-NARDZEWSKI FUNCTION
COMPUTING AND DOMINATING THE RYLL-NARDZEWSKI FUNCTION URI ANDREWS AND ASHER M. KACH Abstract. We study, for a countably categorical theory T, the complexity of computing and the complexity of dominating
More informationBanach-Mazur game played in partially ordered sets
Banach-Mazur game played in partially ordered sets arxiv:1505.01094v1 [math.lo] 5 May 2015 Wies law Kubiś Department of Mathematics Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce, Poland and Institute of Mathematics,
More informationCORES OF COUNTABLY CATEGORICAL STRUCTURES
Logical Methods in Computer Science Vol. 3 (1:2) 2007, pp. 1 16 www.lmcs-online.org Submitted Sep. 23, 2005 Published Jan. 25, 2007 CORES OF COUNTABLY CATEGORICAL STRUCTURES MANUEL BODIRSKY Institut für
More informationIndependence Relations in Theories with the Tree Property. Gwyneth Fae Harrison-Shermoen
Independence Relations in Theories with the Tree Property by Gwyneth Fae Harrison-Shermoen A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
More informationDistinguishing Number of Countable Homogeneous Relational Structures
Distinguishing Number of Countable Homogeneous Relational Structures C. Laflamme University of Calgary Department of Mathematics and Statistics 2500 University Dr. NW. Calgary Alberta Canada T2N1N4 L.
More informationOn the isometry group of the Urysohn space
On the isometry group of the Urysohn space Katrin Tent and Martin Ziegler March 22, 2012 Abstract We give a general criterion for the (bounded) simplicity of the automorphism groups of certain countable
More informationTHE SCHRÖDER-BERNSTEIN PROPERTY FOR a-saturated MODELS
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000 000 S 0002-9939(XX)0000-0 THE SCHRÖDER-BERNSTEIN PROPERTY FOR a-saturated MODELS JOHN GOODRICK AND MICHAEL C. LASKOWSKI (Communicated
More informationGeneralized Pigeonhole Properties of Graphs and Oriented Graphs
Europ. J. Combinatorics (2002) 23, 257 274 doi:10.1006/eujc.2002.0574 Available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on Generalized Pigeonhole Properties of Graphs and Oriented Graphs ANTHONY BONATO, PETER
More informationGEOMETRIC STRUCTURES WITH A DENSE INDEPENDENT SUBSET
GEOMETRIC STRUCTURES WITH A DENSE INDEPENDENT SUBSET ALEXANDER BERENSTEIN AND EVGUENI VASSILIEV Abstract. We generalize the work of [13] on expansions of o-minimal structures with dense independent subsets,
More informationThe random graph. Peter J. Cameron University of St Andrews Encontro Nacional da SPM Caparica, 14 da julho 2014
The random graph Peter J. Cameron University of St Andrews Encontro Nacional da SPM Caparica, 14 da julho 2014 The random graph The countable random graph is one of the most extraordinary objects in mathematics.
More information