COMPLETION AND DIFFERENTIABILITY IN WEAKLY O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES

Similar documents
On the strong cell decomposition property for weakly o-minimal structures

A SIMPLE PROOF OF THE MARKER-STEINHORN THEOREM FOR EXPANSIONS OF ORDERED ABELIAN GROUPS

GROUPS DEFINABLE IN O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES

CONVEXLY ORDERABLE GROUPS AND VALUED FIELDS

Topological groups with dense compactly generated subgroups

MATH 131A: REAL ANALYSIS (BIG IDEAS)

Notes on QE for ACVF

2. The Concept of Convergence: Ultrafilters and Nets

Set, functions and Euclidean space. Seungjin Han

Product metrics and boundedness

Group construction in geometric C-minimal non-trivial structures.

Representing Scott Sets in Algebraic Settings

Definable Extension Theorems in O-minimal Structures. Matthias Aschenbrenner University of California, Los Angeles

Math 730 Homework 6. Austin Mohr. October 14, 2009

Representing Scott Sets in Algebraic Settings

Course 212: Academic Year Section 1: Metric Spaces

Maximilian GANSTER. appeared in: Soochow J. Math. 15 (1) (1989),

WEAK CONVERGENCE THEOREMS FOR EQUILIBRIUM PROBLEMS WITH NONLINEAR OPERATORS IN HILBERT SPACES

Solutions to Tutorial 8 (Week 9)

PERIODS IMPLYING ALMOST ALL PERIODS FOR TREE MAPS. A. M. Blokh. Department of Mathematics, Wesleyan University Middletown, CT , USA

Analysis Finite and Infinite Sets The Real Numbers The Cantor Set

Recursive definitions on surreal numbers

A NOTE ON RATIONAL OPERATOR MONOTONE FUNCTIONS. Masaru Nagisa. Received May 19, 2014 ; revised April 10, (Ax, x) 0 for all x C n.

MASTERS EXAMINATION IN MATHEMATICS SOLUTIONS

Banach-Alaoglu, boundedness, weak-to-strong principles Paul Garrett 1. Banach-Alaoglu theorem

Neighborhood spaces and convergence

LADDER INDEX OF GROUPS. Kazuhiro ISHIKAWA, Hiroshi TANAKA and Katsumi TANAKA

TOPOLOGIES ON SPACES OF VALUATIONS: A CLOSENESS CRITERION. 1. Introduction

Introduction to Topology

Li- Yorke Chaos in Product Dynamical Systems

Maths 212: Homework Solutions

Iowa State University. Instructor: Alex Roitershtein Summer Homework #5. Solutions

CHAPTER 7. Connectedness

g 2 (x) (1/3)M 1 = (1/3)(2/3)M.

ASYMPTOTICALLY NONEXPANSIVE MAPPINGS IN MODULAR FUNCTION SPACES ABSTRACT

Totally supra b continuous and slightly supra b continuous functions

VALUATION THEORY, GENERALIZED IFS ATTRACTORS AND FRACTALS

Real Analysis Math 131AH Rudin, Chapter #1. Dominique Abdi

MATH 614 Dynamical Systems and Chaos Lecture 3: Classification of fixed points.

SOME PROPERTIES ON THE CLOSED SUBSETS IN BANACH SPACES

A G δ IDEAL OF COMPACT SETS STRICTLY ABOVE THE NOWHERE DENSE IDEAL IN THE TUKEY ORDER

3 Measurable Functions

Definable henselian valuation rings

DYNAMICAL PROPERTIES OF MONOTONE DENDRITE MAPS

MTNS Conference, Polynomial Inequalities and Applications. Kyoto, July

Math General Topology Fall 2012 Homework 11 Solutions

Continuous functions that are nowhere differentiable

ON VC-MINIMAL FIELDS AND DP-SMALLNESS

WEAK CONVERGENCE OF RESOLVENTS OF MAXIMAL MONOTONE OPERATORS AND MOSCO CONVERGENCE

Weighted Chebyshev Centres and Intersection Properties of Balls in Banach Spaces

On β-i-open Sets and a Decomposition of Almost-I-continuity

MAT 570 REAL ANALYSIS LECTURE NOTES. Contents. 1. Sets Functions Countability Axiom of choice Equivalence relations 9

Economics 204 Fall 2011 Problem Set 2 Suggested Solutions

On Generalized Topology and Minimal Structure Spaces

The local equicontinuity of a maximal monotone operator

1. Supremum and Infimum Remark: In this sections, all the subsets of R are assumed to be nonempty.

Jónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras

Lebesgue measure on R is just one of many important measures in mathematics. In these notes we introduce the general framework for measures.

Contra θ-c-continuous Functions

arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 14 Jul 2018

Metric Spaces and Topology

NEW NORMALITY AXIOMS AND DECOMPOSITIONS OF NORMALITY. J. K. Kohli and A. K. Das University of Delhi, India

Math 5052 Measure Theory and Functional Analysis II Homework Assignment 7

2 Sequences, Continuity, and Limits

1 Definition of the Riemann integral

A SHORT NOTE ON STRASSEN S THEOREMS

Math 541 Fall 2008 Connectivity Transition from Math 453/503 to Math 541 Ross E. Staffeldt-August 2008

D-MINIMAL EXPANSIONS OF THE REAL FIELD HAVE THE C p ZERO SET PROPERTY

FUNCTIONS WITH MANY LOCAL EXTREMA. 1. introduction

HAIYUN ZHOU, RAVI P. AGARWAL, YEOL JE CHO, AND YONG SOO KIM

Boundary Behavior of Excess Demand Functions without the Strong Monotonicity Assumption

Chapter 1 The Real Numbers

1 The Local-to-Global Lemma

LOCAL CLOSURE FUNCTIONS IN IDEAL TOPOLOGICAL SPACES

NOTES ON O-MINIMALITY

Math Fall 2014 Final Exam Solutions

NATIONAL BOARD FOR HIGHER MATHEMATICS. Research Scholarships Screening Test. Saturday, February 2, Time Allowed: Two Hours Maximum Marks: 40

MICHAEL S SELECTION THEOREM IN D-MINIMAL EXPANSIONS OF THE REAL FIELD

Abstract Monotone Operators Representable by Abstract Convex Functions

CHARACTERIZATION OF (QUASI)CONVEX SET-VALUED MAPS

Yuqing Chen, Yeol Je Cho, and Li Yang

ON FUZZY IDEALS OF PSEUDO MV -ALGEBRAS

arxiv: v2 [math.lo] 24 Jan 2017

Notes on Ordered Sets

FUNDAMENTAL THEOREMS OF ANALYSIS IN FORMALLY REAL FIELDS

Contents Ordered Fields... 2 Ordered sets and fields... 2 Construction of the Reals 1: Dedekind Cuts... 2 Metric Spaces... 3

A LITTLE REAL ANALYSIS AND TOPOLOGY

Logical Connectives and Quantifiers

U e = E (U\E) e E e + U\E e. (1.6)

A note on a construction of J. F. Feinstein

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

ON PARABOLIC HARNACK INEQUALITY

MA651 Topology. Lecture 10. Metric Spaces.

Weak Resolvable Spaces and. Decomposition of Continuity

THE RIEMANN INTEGRAL USING ORDERED OPEN COVERINGS

On I s g-continuous Functions in Ideal Topological Spaces

ZEROS OF SPARSE POLYNOMIALS OVER LOCAL FIELDS OF CHARACTERISTIC p

Some Background Math Notes on Limsups, Sets, and Convexity

Locally uniformly rotund renormings of the spaces of continuous functions on Fedorchuk compacts

h(x) lim H(x) = lim Since h is nondecreasing then h(x) 0 for all x, and if h is discontinuous at a point x then H(x) > 0. Denote

Transcription:

COMPLETION AND DIFFERENTIABILITY IN WEAKLY O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES HIROSHI TANAKA AND TOMOHIRO KAWAKAMI Abstract. Let R = (R, <, +,,... ) be a non-valuational weakly o-minimal real closed field, I a definable convex open subset of R and f : I R a definable function. We prove that {x I : f (x) exists in R} is definable and f is definable if f is differentiable. 1. Introduction Weak o-minimality was introduced by M. A. Dickmann (see [2]). After that several fundamental results of weakly o-minimality were proved by D. Macpherson, D. Marker and C. Steinhorn in [3]. Non-valuational weakly o-minimal expansions of ordered groups and ordered fields were studied by D. Macpherson, D. Marker and C. Steinhorn in [3], by R. Wencel in [6]. Now, it is known that the model theory of weakly o-minimal structures does not develop as smoothly as that of o-minimal structures, see [3]. However non-valuational weakly o- minimal expansions of ordered groups are very similar to o-minimal structures. In particular, R. Wencel showed that every non-valuational weakly o-minimal expansion of an ordered group admits an o-minimal style cell decomposition in [6]. On the other hand, differentiability and analyticity properties of definable functions for weakly o-minimal expansions of real closed fields are scarcely studied (see [3, Open problem 3]). Throughout this paper, definable means definable possibly with parameters and we assume that the structure R = (R, <,...) is an expansion of (R, <) equipped with a dense linear ordering < without endpoints. The set of positive integers is denoted by N. 2. Preliminaries A subset A of R is said to be convex if a, b A and c R with a < c < b then c A. Moreover if A = or inf A, sup A R {, + }, 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 03C64; Secondary 14P10. Key words and phrases. Weakly o-minimal, real closed fields. 1

2 HIROSHI TANAKA AND TOMOHIRO KAWAKAMI then A is called an interval in R. We say that R is o-minimal (weakly o-minimal) if every definable subset of R is a finite union of intervals (convex sets), respectively. For any subsets C, D of R, we write C < D if c < d whenever c C and d D. A pair C, D of non-empty subsets of R is called a cut in R if C < D, C D = R and D has no lowest element. A cut C, D is said to be definable in R if the sets C, D are definable in R. The set of all cuts definable in R will be denoted by R. Note that we have R = R if R is o-minimal. We define a linear ordering on R by C 1, D 1 < C 2, D 2 if and only if C 1 C 2. Then we may treat (R, <) as a substructure of (R, <) by identifying an element a R with the definable cut (, a], (a, + ). We equip R (R) with the interval topology (the open intervals form a base), and each product R n ((R) n ) with the corresponding product topology, respectively. Recall the notion of definable functions from [6]. Let n N and A R n definable. A function f : A R is said to be definable if the set Γ < (f) := { x, y R n+1 : x A, y < f(x)} is definable. A function f : A R {, + } is said to be definable if f is a definable function from A to R, f(x) = for all x A, or f(x) = + for all x A. Let R = (R, <, +,... ) be a weakly o-minimal expansion of an ordered group (R, <, +). By [3, Theorem 5.1], the structure R is divisible and abelian. A cut C, D is said to be non-valuational if inf{y x : x C, y D} = 0. We say that the structure R is non-valuational if all cuts definable in R are non-valuational. Let R = (R, <, +,,... ) be a non-valuational weakly o-minimal expansion of an ordered field (R, <, +, ). By [3, Theorem 5.3], the structure R is real closed. For any subsets A, B of R, we define A + B := {x + y : x A, y B}, A B := {x y : x A, y B}, A B := {x y : x A, y B} and A := { x : x A}. Note that C D = (, 0) and D C = (0, + ) for any element C, D of R. Also notice that for any positive element C, D of R we have inf{x 1 y : x C (0, + ), y D} = 1, and for any negative element C, D of R we have inf{x y 1 : x C, y D (, 0)} = 1. For

WEAKLY O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES 3 any elements C 1, D 1, C 2, D 2 of R, we define C 1, D 1 + C 2, D 2 := R \ (D 1 + D 2 ), D 1 + D 2, C 1, D 1 C 2, D 2 R \ (D 1 D 2 ), D 1 D 2 if 0 C 1 and 0 C 2 cl( (( C 1 ) D 2 )), R \ cl( (( C 1 ) D 2 )) if 0 D 1 and 0 C 2 := cl( (D 1 ( C 2 ))), R \ cl( (D 1 ( C 2 ))) if 0 C 1 and 0 D 2 R \ int(c 1 C 2 ), int(c 1 C 2 ) if 0 D 1 and 0 D 2, where for each n N the topological closure in R n of a set A R n is denoted by cl(a), and its topological interior in R n by int(a). Then, by the argument of [6], the structure (R, <, +, ) is an ordered field and the structure (R, <, +, ) is a subfield of it. Recall the notion of the strong monotonicity from [6]. Definition 2.1. We say that a weakly o-minimal structure R = (R, <,...) has the strong monotonicity if for each definable set I R and each definable function f : I R, there exists a partition of I into a finite set X and definable convex open sets I 1,..., I k such that for each i {1,..., k}, one of the following conditions holds. (1) f I i is constant. (2) f I i is strictly increasing and for any a, b I i with a < b and any c, d R with f(a) < c < d < f(b), there exists some x (a, b) such that c < f(x) < d; in particular f I i is continuous. (3) f I i is strictly decreasing and for any a, b I i with a < b and any c, d R with f(a) > c > d > f(b), there exists some x (a, b) such that c > f(x) > d; in particular f I i is continuous. Theorem 2.2 ([6, Lemma 1.4]). Suppose that R = (R, <, +,...) is a weakly o-minimal expansion of an ordered group (R, <, +). Then the following conditions are equivalent. (1) R is non-valuational. (2) R has the strong monotonicity. 3. Completions in weakly o-minimal structures In this section, we calculate the completion of some weakly o-minimal structures. Let M 1 = (Q, <, P 1 ), where the unary relation symbol P 1 is interpreted by the convex set (, 2) Q. Then, by [1], the structure M 1 is weakly o-minimal.

4 HIROSHI TANAKA AND TOMOHIRO KAWAKAMI Proposition 3.1. We have that M 1 = Q { 2}. Here we consider the cut (, 2), ( 2, + ) the point 2. Proof. Because the structure M 1 admits elimination of quantifiers, we have the proposition. Let M 2 = (Q, <, P 2 ), where the unary relation symbol P 2 is interpreted by the convex set ( 2, 2) Q. Then, by [1], the structure M 2 is weakly o-minimal. Proposition 3.2. We have that M 2 = Q { 2, 2}. Here we consider the cuts (, 2), ( 2, + ), (, 2) and ( 2, + ) the points 2 and 2, respectively. Proof. Let M 2 := (M 2, P 2), where the unary relation symbol P 2 is interpreted by the convex set (, 2) Q. Then, the structure M 2 admits elimination of quantifiers. It follows that M 2 = Q { 2, 2}. Let M 3 = (Q, <, 0, +,, P 3 ), where the unary relation symbol P 3 is interpreted by the convex set (, 2) Q. Then, by [1], the structure M 3 is weakly o-minimal. Proposition 3.3. We have that M 3 = {a + b 2 : a, b Q}. Here we consider the cut (, a + b 2), (a + b 2, + ) the point a + b 2 for each a, b Q. Proof. It was proved in [4] that its definable expansion M 3 := (Q, <, 0, +,, P 3, f m (x)) 1<m<ω admits elimination of quantifiers; here f m (x) = x/m. It follows that M 3 = {a + b 2 : a, b Q}. 4. Differentiability of definable functions Throughout this section, we assume that R = (R, <, +,,...) is a non-valuational weakly o-minimal expansion of a real closed field (R, <, +, ). Lemma 4.1 ([6, Lemma 1.2]). Let I R be a non-empty definable convex open set and f : I R a definable function. Then the limits lim x sup I 0 f(x) and lim x inf I+0 f(x) exist in R {, + }.

WEAKLY O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES 5 Let I be a non-empty definable open subset of R and f : I R a definable function. For each x I, we define the limits f +(x) f(x + t) f(x) := lim, t +0 t f (x) f(x + t) f(x) := lim, t 0 t f f(x + t) f(x) (x) := lim. t 0 t Lemma 4.2 ([5, Lemma 3.3]). Let I R be a non-empty definable convex open set and f : I R a definable function. Then, for each x I the limits f +(x) and f (x) exist in R {, + }. Proof. Suppose that x I. We define g(t) := t 1 (f(x + t) f(x)) on an open interval (0, ε). Then, by Lemma 4.1, the limit f +(x) = lim t +0 g(t) exists in R {, + }. Similarly, the limit f (x) exists in R {, + }. Lemma 4.3. Let I be a non-empty definable convex open subset of R. Let f : I R be a definable function. Then, the sets {x I : f +(x) = + } and {x I : f +(x) = } are definable. Proof. We only show that the set {x I : f +(x) = + } is definable. Let A := {x I : f +(x) = + }. Suppose that x I. Then, there exists ε > 0 such that (x, x + ε) I. We define g x,ε (t) := t 1 (f(x+t) f(x)) on open interval (0, ε). Then, we have A = {x I : there exists ε > 0 such that (x, x + ε) I and lim t +0 g x,ε (t) = + }. By weak o-minimality of R, it follows that lim t +0 g x,ε (t) = + if and only if for all c R there exists δ R with 0 < δ < ε such that g x,ε (t) > c for all t (0, δ). Also, g x,ε (t) > c for all t (0, δ) if and only if for all t (0, δ) there exists d > c such that t, d Γ < (g x,ε ). It follows that A is definable. By Lemmas 4.2 and 4.3, we have the following. Lemma 4.4. Let I be a non-empty definable convex open subset of R. Let f : I R be a definable function. Then, the set {x I : f +(x) exists in R} is definable. Theorem 4.5. Let I be a non-empty definable convex open subset of R. Let f : I R be a definable function. Then the set {x I : f (x) exists in R} is definable. Proof. Let A := {x I : f +(x), f (x) exist in R}. By Lemma 4.4, the set A is definable. For each x A, we define g x,ε (t) := t 1 (f(x + t)

6 HIROSHI TANAKA AND TOMOHIRO KAWAKAMI f(x)) on some set ( ε, ε) \ {0} with (x ε, x + ε) I. We fix x A. By Theorem 2.2, there exists ε > 0 with (x ε, x + ε) I such that g x,ε (0, ε) and g x,ε ( ε, 0) are strictly monotone or constant. Without loss of generality, we may assume that both g x,ε (0, ε) and g x,ε ( ε, 0) are strictly increasing. Now, g x,ε (0, ε) is strictly increasing if and only if for each t 1, t 2 (0, ε) with t 1 < t 2 there exists y R such that t 1, y / Γ < (g x,ε ) and t 2, y Γ < (g x,ε ). Moreover we have that lim t 0 g x,ε (t) < lim t +0 g x,ε (t) if and only if there exist a, b R with a < b such that for each s ( ε, 0) and for each y R, if s, y Γ < (g x,ε ) then y < a, and for each t (0, ε) there exists z R with b < z such that t, z Γ < (g x,ε ). We also have that lim t +0 g x,ε (t) < lim t 0 g x,ε (t) if and only if there exist a, s, t, y, z with s ( ε, 0) and t (0, ε) such that z < a < y, s, y Γ < (g x,ε ) and t, z Γ < (g x,ε ). It follows that the set {x I : f (x) exists in R} is definable. Theorem 4.6. Let I be a non-empty definable convex open subset of R. Let f : I R be a definable function. Suppose that the function f is differentiable at all points of I. Then, the function f : I R is definable. Proof. Let Γ (f +) := { x, y I R : y f +(x)}. For each x, y R, we have that x, y Γ < (f +) if and only if there exists z such that y < z and x, z Γ (f +). Hence, it suffices to show that Γ (f +) is definable. We fix x I. By Theorem 2.2, there exists ε > 0 with (x, x + ε) I such that the definable function g : (0, ε) R defined by g(t) := t 1 (f(x + t) f(x)) is strictly monotone or constant. We assume that the function g is strictly increasing on the open interval (0, ε). The other cases are similar. Then, for each y R we obtain that x, y Γ (f +) if and only if t, y Γ < (g) for each t (0, ε). It follows that Γ (f +) is definable. References [1] Y. Baisalov and B. Poizat, Paires de structures o-minimales, J. Symbolic Logic 63 (1998) 570 578. [2] M. A. Dickmann, Elimination of quantifiers for ordered valuation rings, J. Symbolic Logic 52 (1987) 116 128. [3] D. Macpherson, D. Marker and C. Steinhorn, Weakly o-minimal structures and real closed fields, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 352 (2000) 5435 5483. [4] H. Tanaka, Prime models of weakly o-minimal structures, in preparation. [5] H. Tanaka and T. Kawakami, C r strong cell decompositions in non-valuational weakly o-minimal real closed fields, preprint.

WEAKLY O-MINIMAL STRUCTURES 7 [6] R. Wencel, Weakly o-minimal non-valuational structures, RAAG preprint n. 182 (http://ihp-raag.org/). Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Okayama University 1-1, Naka 3-chome, Tsushima, Okayama 700-8530, Japan E-mail address: htanaka@math.okayama-u.ac.jp Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Education, Wakayama University, Sakaedani Wakayama 640-8510, Japan E-mail address: kawa@center.wakayama-u.ac.jp