Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:55:20.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Some remarks on definable equivalence relations in O-minimal structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Anand Pillay*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 46556

Extract

Let M be an O-minimal structure. We use our understanding, acquired in [KPS], of the structure of definable sets of n-tuples in M, to study definable (in M) equivalence relations on Mn. In particular, we show that if E is an A-definable equivalence relation on Mn (AM) then E has only finitely many classes with nonempty interior in Mn, each such class being moreover also A-definable. As a consequence, we are able to give some conditions under which an O-minimal theory T eliminates imaginaries (in the sense of Poizat [P]).

If L is a first order language and M an L-structure, then by a definable set in M, we mean something of the form XMn, n ≥ 1, where X = {(a1…,an) ∈ Mn: Mϕ(ā)} for some formula L(M). (Here L(M) means L together with names for the elements of M.) If the parameters from come from a subset A of M, we say that X is A-definable.

M is said to be O-minimal if M = (M, <,…), where < is a dense linear order with no first or last element, and every definable set XM is a finite union of points, and intervals (a, b) (where a, bM ∪ {± ∞}). (This notion is as in [PS] except here we demand the underlying order be dense.) The complete theory T is said to be O-minimal if every model of T is O-minimal. (Note that in [KPS] it is proved that if M is O-minimal, then T = Th(M) is O-minimal.) In the remainder of this section and in §2, M will denote a fixed but arbitrary O-minimal structure. A,B,C,… will denote subsets of M.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1986

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

[KPS]Knight, J. F., Pillay, A. and Steinhorn, C., Definable sets in ordered structures. II, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society (to appear).Google Scholar
[L1]Lascar, Daniel, On the category of models of a complete theory, this Journal, vol. 47 (1982), pp. 249266.Google Scholar
[L2]Lascar, Daniel, Sous groupes d'automorphismes d'une structure saturée. Logic Colloquium '82 (Lolli, G.et al., editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, pp. 123134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Po]Poizat, Bruno, Une théorie de Galois imaginaire, this Journal vol. 48 (1983), pp. 11511170.Google Scholar
[PS]Pillay, A. and Steinhorn, C., Definable sets in ordered structures. I, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society (to appear).Google Scholar
[Sh]Shelah, Saharon, Classification theory and the number of nonisomorphic models, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
[vdD]van den Dries, Lou, Algebraic theories with definable Skolem functions, this Journal, vol. 49 (1984), pp. 625629.Google Scholar