A set S of degrees is said to be an initial segment if c ≤ d ∈ S→-c∈S. Shoenfield has shown that if P is the lattice of all subsets of a finite set then there is an initial segment of degrees isomorphic to P. Rosenstein [2] (independently) proved the same to hold of the lattice of all finite subsets of a countable set. We shall show that “countable set” may be replaced by “set of cardinality at most that of the continuum.” This result is also an extension of [3, Corollary 2 to Theorem 15], which states that there is a sublattice of degrees isomorphic to the lattice of all finite subsets of 2 N . (A sublattice of degrees is a subset closed under ∪ and ∩; an initial segment closed under ∪ is necessarily a sublattice, but not conversely.)

It seems worth noting that the proof of the present result was preceded in time by our proof [4] of the analogous theorem for hyperdegrees, and is in fact an adaptation of that proof. Thus the present work has been influenced much more directly by the Gandy-Sacks forcing construction of a minimal hyperdegree [1] than by previous work on initial segments of degrees.

Tag systems were defined by Post [9], [10] and have been studied by a number of researchers including Minsky [7], Maslov [6] and Aanderaa and Belsnes [1]. In their recent paper Aanderaa and Belsnes demonstrated that every r.e. many-one degree (exclusive of the degree of the empty set) is represented by the general halting problem for tag systems, that is, by the family of halting problems ranging over all tag systems. Their result depends upon an informal proof of this property for Turing machines but may be seen to be correct in light of a formal proof due to Overbeek [8]. Our aim is to extend their results to the general word problem for these systems. Specifically, we shall present an effective method which, when applied to an arbitrary r.e. set S, where S is neither empty nor the set of all natural numbers, produces a tag system R′ whose word and halting problems are both of the same many-one degree as the decision problem for S. The proof is realized by first constructing, from the description of an arbitrary Turing machine M, which machine has at least one mortal and one immortal configuration, a 5-register machine R, whose word and halting problems are both of the same many-one degree as the halting problem for M. From R we then construct the desired tag system R′. This construction combined with Overbeek's [8] shows that every r.e. many-one degree (exclusive of the degrees of the empty set and the set of all natural numbers) is represented by the general word and halting problems for tag systems. Moreover our results are seen to be best possible with regard to degrees of unsolvability in that it is not the case that every nonrecursive r.e. one-one degree is represented by either of the general decision problems for tag systems which are considered here. These results were first shown in the author's thesis [3] and were announced in [4], They form part of an extensive study into the many-one equivalence of general decision problems. An overview of the initial findings of this research project may be found in [5].

Rose has shown in [2] that the following axioms are sufficient, with modus ponens, for m-valued Łukasiewiczian implication.

The notion of a minimal form is defined as an extension of the notion of a normal form in λ-β-calculus and its meaning is discussed in a computational environment. The features of the Knuth-Gross reduction strategy are used to prove that to possess a minimal form, for a generic term, is a semidecidable predicate.

Let T and U be any consistent theories of arithmetic. If T is computably enumerable, then the provability predicate $P{r_\tau }\left( x \right)$ of T is naturally obtained from each ${{\rm{\Sigma }}_1}$ definition $\tau \left( v \right)$ of T. The provability logic $P{L_\tau }\left( U \right)$ of τ relative to U is the set of all modal formulas which are provable in U under all arithmetical interpretations where □ is interpreted by $P{r_\tau }\left( x \right)$. It was proved by Beklemishev based on the previous studies by Artemov, Visser, and Japaridze that every $P{L_\tau }\left( U \right)$ coincides with one of the logics $G{L_\alpha }$, ${D_\beta }$, ${S_\beta }$, and $GL_\beta ^ -$, where α and β are subsets of ω and β is cofinite.

We prove that if U is a computably enumerable consistent extension of Peano Arithmetic and L is one of $G{L_\alpha }$, ${D_\beta }$, ${S_\beta }$, and $GL_\beta ^ -$, where α is computably enumerable and β is cofinite, then there exists a ${{\rm{\Sigma }}_1}$ definition $\tau \left( v \right)$ of some extension of $I{{\rm{\Sigma }}_1}$ such that $P{L_\tau }\left( U \right)$ is exactly L.

Let ℒ be the first order language of field theory with an additional one place predicate symbol. In [B2] it was shown that the elementary theory T of the class of all pairs of real closed fields, i.e., ℒ-structures ‹K, L›, K a real closed field, L a real closed subfield of K, is undecidable.

The aim of this paper is to show that the elementary theory Ts of a nontrivial subclass of containing many naturally occurring pairs of real closed fields is decidable (Theorem 3, §5). This result was announced in [B2]. An explicit axiom system for Ts will be given later. At this point let us just mention that any model of Ts, is elementarily equivalent to a pair of power series fields ‹R0((TA)), R1((TB))› where R0 is the field of real numbers, R1 = R0 or the field of real algebraic numbers, and B ⊆ A are ordered divisible abelian groups. Conversely, all these pairs of power series fields are models of Ts.

Theorem 3 together with the undecidability result in [B2] answers some of the questions asked in Macintyre [M]. The proof of Theorem 3 uses the model theoretic techniques for valued fields introduced by Ax and Kochen [A-K] and Ershov [E] (see also [C-K]). The two main ingredients are

(i) the completeness of the elementary theory of real closed fields with a distinguished dense proper real closed subfield (due to Robinson [R]),

(ii) the decidability of the elementary theory of pairs of ordered divisible abelian groups (proved in §§1-4).

I would like to thank Angus Macintyre for fruitful discussions concerning the subject. The valuation theoretic method of classifying theories of pairs of real closed fields is taken from [M].

It is proved that any countable index, universally measurable subgroup of a Polish group is open. By consequence, any universally measurable homomorphism from a Polish group into the infinite symmetric group S∞ is continuous. It is also shown that a universally measurable homomorphism from a Polish group into a second countable, locally compact group is necessarily continuous.

The characterization of classes of r.e. sets by their index sets has proved valuable in producing new results about the r.e. sets and degrees. The classic example is Yates' proof [5, Theorem 7] of Sacks' density theorem for r.e. degrees using his classification of {e: We ≤TD) as Σ3(D) whenever D is r.e. Theorem 1 of this paper is a refinement of this index set theorem of Yates which has already proved to have interesting consequences about the r.e. degrees. This theorem was originally announced by Kallibekov [1, Theorem 1]. Kallibekov there proposed a new and ingenious method for doing priority arguments which has also since been used by Kinber [2]. Unfortunately his proof to this particular theorem contains an error. We have a totally different proof using standard techniques which is of independent interest.

The proof to Theorem 1 is an infinite injury priority argument. In §1 therefore we give a short summary of the infinite injury priority method. We draw heavily on the exposition of Soare [4] where a complete description of the method is given along with many examples. In §2 we prove the main theorem and also give what we think are the most interesting corollaries to this theorem announced by Kallibekov. In §3 we prove a theorem about Σ3 sets of indices of r.e. sets. This theorem is a strengthening of a theorem of Kinber [2, Theorem 1] which was proved using a modification of Kallibekov's technique. As application, we use our theorem to show that an r.e. set A has supersets of every r.e. degree iff A is not simple.

Let T be an NIP ${\cal L}$-theory and $\mathop T\limits^\~ $ be an enrichment. We give a sufficient condition on $\mathop T\limits^\~$ for the underlying ${\cal L}$-type of any definable (respectively invariant) type over a model of $\mathop T\limits^\~$ to be definable (respectively invariant). These results are then applied to Scanlon’s model completion of valued differential fields.

In this paper we will do some model theory with respect to the models, defined in [7] and, as in [7], we will work again in intuitionistic metamathematics.

In this paper we will only consider models M = ‹S, TM›, where S is one fixed spreadlaw for all models M, namely the universal spreadlaw. That we can restrict ourselves to this class of models is a consequence of the completeness proof, which is sketched in [7, §3].

The main tools in this paper will be two model-constructions:

(i) In §1 we will consider, under a certain condition C(M0, M, s), the construction of a model R(M0, M, s) from two models M0 and M with respect to the finite sequence s.

(ii) In §2 we will construct from an infinite sequence M0, M1, M2, … of models a new model Σi∈INMi.

Syntactic proofs of the disjunction property and the explicit definability theorem are well known.

C. Smorynski [8] gave semantic proofs of these theorems with respect to Kripke models, however using classical metamathematics. In §1 we will give intuitionistically correct, semantic proofs with respect to the models, defined in [7] using Brouwer's continuity principle.

Let W be the fan of all models (see [7, Theorem 2.7]) and let Γ be a countably infinite sequence of sentences.

Given a countable o-minimal theory T, we characterize the Borel complexity of isomorphism for countable models of T up to two model-theoretic invariants. If T admits a nonsimple type, then it is shown to be Borel complete by embedding the isomorphism problem for linear orders into the isomorphism problem for models of T. This is done by constructing models with specific linear orders in the tail of the Archimedean ladder of a suitable nonsimple type.

If the theory admits no nonsimple types, then we use Mayer’s characterization of isomorphism for such theories to compute invariants for countable models. If the theory is small, then the invariant is real-valued, and therefore its isomorphism relation is smooth. If not, the invariant corresponds to a countable set of reals, and therefore the isomorphism relation is Borel equivalent to F2.

Combining these two results, we conclude that $\left( {{\rm{Mod}}\left( T \right), \cong } \right)$ is either maximally complicated or maximally uncomplicated (subject to completely general model-theoretic lower bounds based on the number of types and the number of countable models).

Given two structures ${\cal M}$ and ${\cal N}$ on the same domain, we say that ${\cal N}$ is a reduct of ${\cal M}$ if all $\emptyset$-definable relations of ${\cal N}$ are $\emptyset$-definable in ${\cal M}$. In this article the reducts of the Henson digraphs are classified. Henson digraphs are homogeneous countable digraphs that omit some set of finite tournaments. As the Henson digraphs are ${\aleph _0}$-categorical, determining their reducts is equivalent to determining the closed supergroups G ≤ Sym(ℕ) of their automorphism groups.

A consequence of the classification is that there are ${2^{{\aleph _0}}}$ pairwise noninterdefinable Henson digraphs which have no proper nontrivial reducts. Taking their automorphisms groups gives a positive answer to a question of Macpherson that asked if there are ${2^{{\aleph _0}}}$ pairwise nonconjugate maximal-closed subgroups of Sym(ℕ). By the reconstruction results of Rubin, these groups are also nonisomorphic as abstract groups.

We study the problem of existence and generic existence of ultrafilters on ω. We prove a conjecture of Jörg Brendle's showing that there is an ultrafilter that is countably closed but is not an ordinal ultrafilter under CH. We also show that Canjar's previous partial characterization of the generic existence of Q-points is the best that can be done. More simply put, there is no normal cardinal invariant equality that fully characterizes the generic existence of Q-points. We then sharpen results on generic existence with the introduction of σ-compact ultrafilters. We show that the generic existence of said ultrafilters is equivalent to . This result, taken along with our result that there exists a Kσ, non-countably closed ultrafilter under CH, expands the size of the class of ultrafilters that were known to fit this description before. From the core of the proof, we get a new result on the cardinal invariants of the continuum, i.e., the cofinality of the sets with σ-compact closure is .

The Martin-Steel coarse inner model theory is employed in obtaining new results in descriptive set theory. determinacy implies that for every thin equivalence relation there is a real, N, over which every equivalence class is generic—and hence there is a good (N#) wellordering of the equivalence classes. Analogous results are obtained for and quasilinear orderings and determinacy is shown to imply that every prewellorder has rank less than .

Generalising Hrushovski's fusion technique we construct the free fusion of two strongly minimal theories T1. T2 intersecting in a totally categorical sub-theory T0. We show that if. e.g., T0 is the theory of infinite vector spaces over a finite field then the fusion theory Tω, exists, is complete and ω-stable of rank ω. We give a detailed geometrical analysis of Tω, proving that if both T1, T2 are 1-based then. Tω can be collapsed into a strongly minimal theory, if some additional technical conditions hold—all trivially satisfied if T0 is the theory of infinite vector spaces over a finite field .

We shall be concerned here with weak axiomatic systems of set theory with a universal set. The language in which they are expressed is that of set theory—two primitive predicates, = and ϵ, and no function symbols (though some function symbols will be introduced by definitional abbreviation). All the theories will have stratified axioms only, and they will all have Ext (extensionality: (∀x)(∀y)(x = y· ↔ ·(∀z)(z ϵ x ↔ z ϵ y))). In fact, in addition to extensionality, they have only axioms saying that the universe is closed under certain set-theoretic operations, viz. all of the form

and these will always include singleton, i.e., ι′x exists if x does (the iota notation for singleton, due to Russell and Whitehead, is used here to avoid confusion with {x: Φ}, set abstraction), and also x ∪ y, x ∩ y and − x (the complement of x). The system with these axioms is called NF2 in the literature (see [F]). The other axioms we consider will be those giving ⋃x, ⋂x, {y: y ⊆x} and {y: x ⊆ y}. We will frequently have occasion to bear in mind that 〈 V, ⊆ 〉 is a Boolean algebra in any theory extending NF2. There is no use of the axiom of choice at any point in this paper. Since the systems with which we will be concerned exhibit this feature of having, in addition to extensionality, only axioms stating that V is closed under certain operations, we will be very interested in terms of the theories in question. A T-term, for T such a theory, is a thing (with no free variables) built up from V or ∧ by means of the T-operations, which are of course the operations that the axioms of T say the universe is closed under.

Let α be an admissible ordinal, and let (α) denote the lattice of α-r.e. sets, ordered by set inclusion. An α-r.e. set A is α*-finite if it is α-finite and has ordertype less than α* (the Σ1 projectum of α). An a-r.e. set S is simple if (the complement of S) is not α*-finite, but all the α-r.e. subsets of are α*-finite. Fixing a first-order language ℒ suitable for lattice theory (see [2, §1] for such a language), and noting that the α*-finite sets are exactly those elements of (α), all of whose α-r.e. subsets have complements in (α) (see [4, p. 356]), we see that the class of simple α-r.e. sets is definable in ℒ over (α). In [4, §6, (Q22)], we asked whether an admissible ordinal α exists for which all simple α-r.e. sets have the same 1-type. We were particularly interested in this question for α = ℵ1 L (L is Gödel's universe of constructible sets). We will show that for all α which are regular cardinals of L (ℵ1 L is, of course, such an α), there are simple α-r.e. sets with different 1-types.

The sentence exhibited which differentiates between simple α-r.e. sets is not the first one which comes to mind. Using α = ω for intuition, one would expect any of the sentences “S is a maximal α-r.e. set”, “S is an r-maximal α-r.e. set”, or “S is a hyperhypersimple α-r.e. set” to differentiate between simple α-r.e. sets. However, if α > ω is a regular cardinal of L, there are no maximal, r-maximal, or hyperhypersimple α-r.e. sets (see [4, Theorem 4.11], [5, Theorem 5.1] and [1,Theorem 5.21] respectively). But another theorem of (ω) points the way.