Computability in the class of Real Closed Fields

Similar documents
The Scott Isomorphism Theorem

More Model Theory Notes

CODING AND DEFINABILITY IN COMPUTABLE STRUCTURES

Math 225A Model Theory. Speirs, Martin

Classifying classes of structures in model theory

Problems of autostability relative to strong constructivizations Sergey Goncharov Institute of Mathematics of SBRAS Novosibirsk State University

Scott Sentences in Uncountable Structures

Representing Scott Sets in Algebraic Settings

EFFECTIVELY EXISTENTIALLY-ATOMIC STRUCTURES

SPECTRA OF ATOMIC THEORIES

VAUGHT S THEOREM: THE FINITE SPECTRUM OF COMPLETE THEORIES IN ℵ 0. Contents

Löwenheim-Skolem Theorems, Countable Approximations, and L ω. David W. Kueker (Lecture Notes, Fall 2007)

Representing Scott Sets in Algebraic Settings

ω-stable Theories: Introduction

October 12, Complexity and Absoluteness in L ω1,ω. John T. Baldwin. Measuring complexity. Complexity of. concepts. to first order.

Introduction to Model Theory

Algebras with finite descriptions

Computable Transformations of Structures

Datalog and Constraint Satisfaction with Infinite Templates

Set Theory and Models of Arithmetic ALI ENAYAT. First European Set Theory Meeting

Foundations. September 4, Foundations. A Model Theoretic Perspective. John T. Baldwin. sociology. Thesis I. Thesis II. A Concept Analysis

Forking and Dividing in Random Graphs

I-Indexed Indiscernible Sets and Trees

(9-5) Def Turing machine, Turing computable functions. (9-7) Def Primitive recursive functions, Primitive recursive implies Turing computable.

The Vaught Conjecture Do uncountable models count?

MATHEMATICS: CONCEPTS, AND FOUNDATIONS Vol. II - Model Theory - H. Jerome Keisler

tp(c/a) tp(c/ab) T h(m M ) is assumed in the background.

AMS regional meeting Bloomington, IN April 1, 2017

March 3, The large and small in model theory: What are the amalgamation spectra of. infinitary classes? John T. Baldwin

Properly forking formulas in Urysohn spaces

Main Goals. The Computably Enumerable Sets. The Computably Enumerable Sets, Creative Sets

Qualifying Exam Logic August 2005

Complete sets of Π c n relations.

Algebraic Tractability Criteria for Infinite-Domain Constraint Satisfaction Problems

Computability theory and uncountable structures

2.2 Lowenheim-Skolem-Tarski theorems

Unary Automatic Graphs: An Algorithmic Perspective 1

A ROBUSTER SCOTT RANK

arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 22 Mar 2008

Computability Theoretic Properties of Injection Structures

A MODEL-THEORETIC PROOF OF HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ

Applications of model theory in extremal graph combinatorics

The jump of a structure.

Overview of Topics. Finite Model Theory. Finite Model Theory. Connections to Database Theory. Qing Wang

Definability of Recursive Predicates in the Induced Subgraph Order

COPYABLE STRUCTURES ANTONIO MONTALBÁN

EXISTENTIALLY CLOSED II 1 FACTORS. 1. Introduction

Disjoint n-amalgamation

Model Theory and Forking Independence

Model Theory MARIA MANZANO. University of Salamanca, Spain. Translated by RUY J. G. B. DE QUEIROZ

LGIC 310/MATH 570/PHIL 006 Fall, 2010 Scott Weinstein 9

A Vaught s conjecture toolbox

A computably stable structure with no Scott family of finitary formulas

The Arithmetical Hierarchy in the Setting of ω 1 - Computability

A COMPUTABLE FUNCTOR FROM GRAPHS TO FIELDS

Special Topics on Applied Mathematical Logic

Degree Spectra J.Kepler Universitaet Linz NOCAS - RISC. Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Sofia University

DEGREES OF PRESENTABILITY OF STRUCTURES. I A. I. Stukachev UDC 510.5

Strong theories, burden, and weight

MODEL THEORY FOR ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY

Herbrand Theorem, Equality, and Compactness

DEGREES OF CATEGORICITY AND THE HYPERARITHMETIC HIERARCHY

1 The decision problem for First order logic

Topological clones. Michael Pinsker. Technische Universität Wien / Univerzita Karlova v Praze. Funded by Austrian Science Fund (FWF) grant P27600

Introduction to Model theory Zoé Chatzidakis CNRS (Paris 7) Notes for Luminy, November 2001

Elementary Equivalence, Partial Isomorphisms, and. Scott-Karp analysis

The complexity of recursive constraint satisfaction problems.

Part III Logic. Theorems. Based on lectures by T. E. Forster Notes taken by Dexter Chua. Lent 2017

Model Theoretic Complexity of Automatic Structures (Extended Abstract)

Math 225A Model Theory. Speirs, Martin

The Theory of Fields is Complete for Isomorphisms

Model theory of algebraically closed fields

ON THE COMPUTABILITY-THEORETIC COMPLEXITY OF TRIVIAL, STRONGLY MINIMAL MODELS

Constraint satisfaction problems over infinite domains

FIRST ORDER SENTENCES ON G(n, p), ZERO-ONE LAWS, ALMOST SURE AND COMPLETE THEORIES ON SPARSE RANDOM GRAPHS

Model theory for metric structures

Muchnik and Medvedev Degrees of Π 0 1

CCR 2013 Buenos Aires

Introduction. Itaï Ben-Yaacov C. Ward Henson. September American Institute of Mathematics Workshop. Continuous logic Continuous model theory

Bounding Prime Models

Pseudo-finite model theory

Easy and hard homogenizable structures

A DISCUSSION OF KEISLER S ORDER

A product of γ-sets which is not Menger.

The Relation Reflection Scheme

THE DEGREES OF CATEGORICAL THEORIES WITH RECURSIVE MODELS

López-Escobar s theorem and metric structures

Between proof theory and model theory Three traditions in logic: Syntactic (formal deduction)

Embedding and Coding Below a 1-Generic Degree

Solutions to Unique Readability Homework Set 30 August 2011

THE METAMATHEMATICS OF RANDOM GRAPHS

A New Spectrum of Recursive Models Using An Amalgamation Construction

The Metamathematics of Randomness

Degree Spectra and Computable Dimensions in Algebraic Structures

PRESERVATION THEOREMS IN LUKASIEWICZ MODEL THEORY

Three Red Herrings around Vaught s Conjecture

Lecture 8-9 Decidable and Undecidable Theories

Π 0 1-presentations of algebras

Three Red Herrings around Vaught s Conjecture

Intermediate Model Theory

Transcription:

Computability in the class of Real Closed Fields Víctor A. Ocasio-González Department of Mathematics University of Notre Dame MCS @ UChicago Oct. 1, 2013

Outline 1 Turing computable embeddings 2 Categoricity in RCF

Real Closed Fields All structures have countable universe and all classes are closed under isomorphism. RCF = Mod(T h(r, +,, 0, 1, <))

Real Closed Fields All structures have countable universe and all classes are closed under isomorphism. RCF = Mod(T h(r, +,, 0, 1, <)) RCF has many nice model theoretic properties Complete, decidable, o-minimal and accepts quantifier elimination. Definable Skolemization which preserves the properties above.

Skolemization of RCF Let R RCF and X R n be definable, say by ϕ( x, y). Let Xā = {y (ā, y) X}. Then we have: if Xā is empty, then f ϕ (ā) = 0 if Xā has a least element b, then f ϕ (ā) = b if the leftmost interval of Xā is (c, d), then f ϕ (ā) = d c 2 if the leftmost interval of Xā is (, d), then f ϕ (ā) = d 1 if the leftmost interval of Xā is (c, ), then f ϕ (ā) = c + 1

TC embeddings Definition Let K and K be two classes of structures. A Turing computable embedding from K to K is a Turing operator Φ = ϕ e such that: for each A K, there is a A K such that ϕ D(A) e = χ D(A ) for A, B K correspond, respectively, to A, B K then A B iff A B.

TC embeddings Definition Let K and K be two classes of structures. A Turing computable embedding from K to K is a Turing operator Φ = ϕ e such that: for each A K, there is a A K such that ϕ D(A) e = χ D(A ) for A, B K correspond, respectively, to A, B K then A B iff A B. Uniform procedure that respects isomorphism types. For K and K as above we write that K tc K, so that TCE induces a preordering or classes.

TC embeddings For all classes K, K tc UG tc LO tc RCF.

TC embeddings For all classes K, K tc UG tc LO tc RCF. Definition (Multiplicative Archimedean classes) Let R RCF and let r, s R with r, s > 0. We say r < m s iff q Q r q < s

TC embeddings For all classes K, K tc UG tc LO tc RCF. Definition (Multiplicative Archimedean classes) Let R RCF and let r, s R with r, s > 0. We say r < m s iff q Q r q < s ARCF is a subclass of the class RCF where structures have no infinite elements, i.e only multiplicative classes are [1] m and [2] m.

Daisy graphs and ARCF Definition A daisy graph is an undirected graph G with a distinguished vertex, say x 0, and a set of edges E, such that every vertex x x 0 in the universe of G is part of a unique loop containing x 0. Every S ω can be represented as a daisy graph by having a loop of size 2n + 3 if n S and a loop is size 2n + 4 otherwise.

Daisy graphs and ARCF Definition A daisy graph is an undirected graph G with a distinguished vertex, say x 0, and a set of edges E, such that every vertex x x 0 in the universe of G is part of a unique loop containing x 0. Every S ω can be represented as a daisy graph by having a loop of size 2n + 3 if n S and a loop is size 2n + 4 otherwise. So, A DG is a collection of daisy graphs each representing a distinct subset of ω.

Daisy graphs and ARCF Definition A daisy graph is an undirected graph G with a distinguished vertex, say x 0, and a set of edges E, such that every vertex x x 0 in the universe of G is part of a unique loop containing x 0. Every S ω can be represented as a daisy graph by having a loop of size 2n + 3 if n S and a loop is size 2n + 4 otherwise. So, A DG is a collection of daisy graphs each representing a distinct subset of ω. ARCF tc DG

Daisy graphs and ARCF Definition A daisy graph is an undirected graph G with a distinguished vertex, say x 0, and a set of edges E, such that every vertex x x 0 in the universe of G is part of a unique loop containing x 0. Every S ω can be represented as a daisy graph by having a loop of size 2n + 3 if n S and a loop is size 2n + 4 otherwise. So, A DG is a collection of daisy graphs each representing a distinct subset of ω. ARCF tc DG ApG tc DG

DG tc ARCF The reverse the procedure above to get DG tc ARCF will not work

DG tc ARCF The reverse the procedure above to get DG tc ARCF will not work If we are to succeed in DG tc ARCF, we must do so by associating families of sets to families of algebraically independent reals.

DG tc ARCF The reverse the procedure above to get DG tc ARCF will not work If we are to succeed in DG tc ARCF, we must do so by associating families of sets to families of algebraically independent reals. Theorem There is a perfect, computable, binary tree T whose continuum many paths represent algebraically independent reals over Q.

DG tc ARCF Theorem There is a perfect, computable, binary tree T whose continuum many paths represent algebraically independent reals over Q. Recall: A tree T is perfect if for every σ T there is σ τ such that τ 0, τ 1 T.

DG tc ARCF Theorem There is a perfect, computable, binary tree T whose continuum many paths represent algebraically independent reals over Q. Recall: A tree T is perfect if for every σ T there is σ τ such that τ 0, τ 1 T. Note: T 2 <ω Q Q, where σ (q, q ) which we interpret as an interval I σ = [q, q ]

DG tc ARCF Theorem There is a perfect, computable, binary tree T whose continuum many paths represent algebraically independent reals over Q. 1 T ( ) = [0, 1] 2 If σ τ, then I τ I σ. 3 If length(σ) = n, then diameter(i σ ) 2 n, where diameter(a, b), for an interval (a, b), is defined to be b a. 4 If σ, τ are incomparable and both of length n, I σ I τ = 5 For f 2 ω, let r f be the unique real in σ f I σ. Then for distinct f 1,..., f n 2 ω, r f1,..., r fn are algebraically independent.

Further work on TCE Definition For all 0 n, let V RCF n be all structures with n + 2 distinct multiplicative classes. Obs. ARCF = V RCF 0

Further work on TCE Definition For all 0 n, let V RCF n be all structures with n + 2 distinct multiplicative classes. Obs. ARCF = V RCF 0 Theorem For all 0 n < ω, V RCF n tc V RCF n+1 Theorem ARCF < tc V RCF 1

ARCF < tc V RCF 1 Theorem (Pull-Back Theorem, Knight, Miller, Vanden Boom) If K tc K via some Φ, then for any computable infinitary sentence ϕ in the language of K we can find a computable infinitary sentence ϕ in the language of K such that for all A K, A ϕ iff Φ(A) ϕ. Moreover, if ϕ is Σ α (Π α ) then so is ϕ. A B ARCF iff A and B satisfy the same Σ c 2 sentences. We find V and V V RCF 1 non-isomorphic satisfying the same Σ c 2 sentences.

ARCF < tc V RCF 1 Lemma V = RC(Q(g, a 0,..., a n,...)) and V = RC(V(b)), where b = Σ i a i g qi (q i ) i<ω decreasing sequence converging to an irrational. For any Π 0 2 set S, we can uniformly produce a sequence of structures (F n ) n<ω such that F n V if n S and F n V otherwise.

Relative Categoricity Definition (Relatively 0 γ-categorical) A structure A is relatively 0 γ-categorical if for all structures B A, there is some isomorphism F A B such that F is 0 γ(b).

Relative Categoricity A structure A is relatively 0 γ categorical iff A has a formally Σ c γ Scott family. Definition A formally Σ c γ Scott family for a structure A is a set Φ of formulas, with fixed parameters c from A, such that: for each tuple ā of elements of A, there is a formula ϕ( x, c) Φ, such that A ϕ(ā, c) if two tuples ā and b from A satisfy the same formula from Φ, then there is an automorphism of A mapping ā to b

Motivation Theorem (Corollary from work of Nurtazin) Let R be a computable RCF, then R is computably categorical if and only if R has finite transcendence degree. Theorem (Calvert) If R is a computable archimedean RCF, then R is 0 2 -categorical. Moral: The complexity is in the infinite elements.

Two Results Theorem (Ash) Suppose α is a computable ordinal, with ω δ+n α < ω δ+n+1, δ is either 0 or a limit ordinal, and n < ω. Then α is 0 δ+2n-stable but not 0 β-stable for β < δ + 2n. Theorem Let α be a computable well-order and let R α be the RCF constructed around α. Then R α is relatively 0 γ-categorical and not 0 β-categorical for β < γ, where n < ω and γ = { 2n + 1, if ωn α < ω n+1 δ + 2n, if ω δ+n α < ω δ+n+1

Relative categoricity LO λ 0 (x) ( y)(x y) RCF x m y x < y n & y < x n n N n N

Relative categoricity LO λ 0 (x) ( y)(x y) RCF x m y n N x < y n & n N y < x n λ 0(x) INF (x) & ( y)(x m y x < m y)

Scott family for R α For all β < α, we take all formulas of the form: ϕ( x) ( y 1 ) ( y i )(λ β 1 (y 1 ) & & λ β i (y i ) & ψ( x, ȳ)), where ψ( x, ȳ) is quantifier free.

THANK YOU