Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:06:20.759Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

GENERICITY AND RANDOMNESS WITH ITTMS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2019

BENOÎT MONIN  and
PAUL-ELLIOT ANGLÈS D’AURIAC
BENOÎT MONIN
Affiliation:
LACL, DÉPARTEMENT D’INFORMATIQUE FACULTÉ DES SCIENCES ET TECHNOLOGIE 61 AVENUE DU GÉNÉRAL DE GAULLE 94010 CRÉTEIL CEDEX E-mail: [email protected]
PAUL-ELLIOT ANGLÈS D’AURIAC
Affiliation:
LACL, DÉPARTEMENT D’INFORMATIQUE FACULTÉ DES SCIENCES ET TECHNOLOGIE 61 AVENUE DU GÉNÉRAL DE GAULLE 94010 CRÉTEIL CEDEX E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We study genericity and randomness with respect to ITTMs, continuing the work initiated by Carl and Schlicht. To do so, we develop a framework to study randomness in the constructible hierarchy. We then answer several of Carl and Schlicht’s question. We also ask a new question one the equality of two classes of randoms. Although the natural intuition would dictate that the two classes are distinct, we show that things are not as simple as they seem. In particular we show that the categorical analogues of these two classes coincide, in contradiction with the natural intuition. Even though we are not able to answer the question for randomness in this article, we delineate and sharpen its contour and outline.

Keywords

03D60algorithmic randomnessITTMforcingconstructibleshigher computability
Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 84 , Issue 4 , December 2019 , pp. 1670 - 1710
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Symbolic Logic 2019 

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

Anglès d’Auriac, P.-E. and Monin, B., Another characterization of the higher k-trivials, 42nd International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (Larsen, K. G., Bodlaender, H. L., and Raskin, J.-F., editors), LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 83, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, 2017, pp. 34:1–34:13.Google Scholar
Barwise, J., Admissible Sets and Structures, vol. 7, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017.Google Scholar
Bienvenu, L., Greenberg, N., and Monin, B., Continuous higher randomness. Journal of Mathematical Logic, vol. 17 (2017), no. 1, 1750004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carl, M. and Schlicht, P., Randomness via infinite computation and effective descriptive set theory, arXiv e-prints, 2016.Google Scholar
Carl, M. and Schlicht, P., Infinite computations with random oracles. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 58 (2017), no. 2, pp. 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, C. T., Nies, A., and Yu, L., Lowness of higher randomness notions. Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 166 (2008), no. 1, pp. 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, C. T. and Yu, L., Randomness in the higher setting, this Journal, vol. 80 (2015), no. 4, pp. 1131–1148.Google Scholar
Cohen, P. J., Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis, W. A. Benjamin, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
Devlin, K. J., Constructibility, vol. 6, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017.Google Scholar
Downey, R. G. and Hirschfeldt, D. R., Algorithmic Randomness and Complexity, Theory and Applications of Computability, Springer, Wiesbaden, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, S.-D. and Welch, P. D., Two observations concerning infinite time turing machines. BIWOC (2007), pp. 44–47.Google Scholar
Greenberg, N. and Monin, B., Higher randomness and genericity. Forum of mathematics, Sigma, vol. 5 (2017), e. 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamkins, J. D. and Lewis, A., Infinite time turing machines, this Journal, vol. 65 (2000), no. 02, pp. 567–604.Google Scholar
Hamkins, J. D. and Seabold, D. E., Infinite time turing machines with only one tape. Mathematical Logic Quarterly, vol. 47 (2001), no. 2, pp. 271–287.3.0.CO;2-6>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hjorth, G. and Nies, A., Randomness via effective descriptive set theory. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 75 (2007), no. 2, pp. 495–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurtz, S., Randomness and genericity in the degrees of unsolvability. Dissertation Abstracts International Part B: Science and Engineering, vol. 42 (1982), no. 9, p. 1982.Google Scholar
Kurtz, S., Notions of weak genericity, this Journal, vol. 48 (1983), no. 03, pp. 764–770.Google Scholar
Martin-Löf, P., The definition of random sequences. Information and Control, vol. 9 (1966), pp. 602–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monin, B., Higher randomness and forcing with closed sets, 31st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (Mayr, E. W. and Portier, N., editors), LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 25, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, 2014, pp. 566–577.Google Scholar
Nies, A., Computability and Randomness, Oxford Logic Guides, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, P. D., The length of infinite time turing machine computations. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 32 (2000), no. 2, p. 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar