Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T16:58:03.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characterization of recursively enumerable sets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Jesse B. Wright*
Affiliation:
IBM—Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598

Abstract

Let N, O and S denote the set of nonnegative integers, the graph of the constant 0 function and the graph of the successor function respectively. For sets P, Q, RN2 operations of transposition, composition, and bracketing are defined as follows: P = {〈x, y〉 ∣ 〈y, x〉 ∈ P}, PQ = {〈x, z〉 ∣ ∃yx, y〉 ∈ P & 〈y, z〉 ∈ Q}, and [P, Q, R] = ⋃nM(Pn Q Rn).

Theorem. The class of recursively enumerable subsets of N2 is the smallest class of sets with O and S as members and closed under transposition, composition, and bracketing.

This result is derived from a characterization by Julia Robinson of the class of general recursive functions of one variable in terms of function composition and “definition by general recursion.” A key step in the proof is to show that if a function F is defined by general recursion from functions A, M, P and R then F = [P, AM, R].

The above definitions of the transposition, composition, and bracketing operations on subsets of N2 can be generalized to subsets of X2 for an arbitrary set X. In this abstract setting it is possible to show that the bracket operation can be defined in terms of K, L, transposition, composition, intersection, and reflexive transitive closure where K: XX and L: XX are functions for decoding pairs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Robinson, Julia, Recursive functions of one variable, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 19 (1968), pp. 815820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Eilenberg, S. and Elgot, C. C., Recursiveness, Academic Press, New York, 1970. (Cf. p. 41, Proposition 1.5, and Corollary 3.2, p. 44.)Google Scholar