Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-wjqwx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-21T10:24:51.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ARTIN–SCHREIER EXTENSIONS AND COMBINATORIAL COMPLEXITY IN HENSELIAN VALUED FIELDS

Part of: Model theory Connections with logic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2024

BLAISE BOISSONNEAU Open the ORCID record for BLAISE BOISSONNEAU [Opens in a new window]
BLAISE BOISSONNEAU*
Affiliation:
DÉPARTEMENT DE MATHÉMATIQUES ACADÉMIE DE PARIS 12, BOULEVARD D’INDOCHINE 75019 PARIS, FRANCE
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We give explicit formulas witnessing IP, IP$_{\!n}$, or TP2 in fields with Artin–Schreier extensions. We use them to control p-extensions of mixed characteristic henselian valued fields, allowing us most notably to generalize to the NIP$_{\!n}$ context one way of Anscombe–Jahnke’s classification of NIP henselian valued fields. As a corollary, we obtain that NIP$_{\!n}$ henselian valued fields with NIP residue field are NIP. We also discuss tameness results for NTP2 henselian valued fields.

Keywords

logicmodel theoryvalued fieldshenselianityArtin–Schreier extensionNIPNIPnNTP2

MSC classification

Primary: 03C45: Classification theory, stability and related concepts 03C60: Model-theoretic algebra 12L12: Model theory
Type
Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 89 , Issue 4 , December 2024 , pp. 1747 - 1767
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Symbolic Logic

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anscombe, S. and Jahnke, F., Characterizing NIP henselian fields . Journal of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 109 (2024), p. e12868. https://doi.org/10.1112/jlms.12868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anscombe, S. and Kuhlmann, F.-V., Notes on extremal and tame valued fields . Journal of Symbolic Logic , vol. 81 (2016), no. 2, pp. 400–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, J. and Saxl, J., Logical stability in group theory . Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , vol. 21 (1976), pp. 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boissonneau, B., NIPn CHIPS, preprint, 2024, arXiv:2401.04697.Google Scholar
Chernikov, A. and Hempel, N., Mekler’s construction and generalized stability . Israel Journal of Mathematics , vol. 230 (2019), pp. 745–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernikov, A. and Hempel, N., On n-dependent groups and fields II, with an appendix by Martin Bays . Forum of Mathematics, Sigma , vol. 9 (2021), p. e38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernikov, A., Kaplan, I., and Simon, P., Groups and fields with NTP2 . Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , vol. 143 (2012), p. 12.Google Scholar
Duret, J.-L., Les corps faiblement algébriquement clos non separablement clos ont la propriété d’indépendance , Model Theory of Algebra and Arithmetic (Pacholski, L., Wierzejewski, J., and Wilkie, A. J., editors), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 834, Springer, Berlin, 1980, pp. 136–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, N., On n-dependent groups and fields . Mathematical Logic Quarterly , vol. 62 (2016), no. 3, pp. 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hils, M., Model theory of valued fields , Lectures in Model Theory (Jahnke, F., Palacín, D., and Tent, K., editors), European Mathematical Society, Helsinki, 2018, pp. 151–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahnke, F., Henselian expansions of NIP fields . Journal of Mathematical Logic , vol. 24 (2024), p. 2350006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, I., Scanlon, T., and Wagner, F. O., Artin–Schreier extensions in NIP and simple fields . Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 185 (2011), pp. 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11856-011-0104-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenigsmann, J., P-Henselian fields . Manuscripta Mathematica , vol. 87 (1995), no. 1, pp. 89–99 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhlmann, F.-V., Valued fields with finitely many defect extensions of prime degree . Journal of Algebra and Its Applications , vol. 21 (2021), p. 2250049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhlmann, F.-V. and Rzepka, A., The valuation theory of deeply ramified fields and its connection with defect extensions, preprint, 2021, arXiv:1811.04396v3.Google Scholar
Montenegro, S., Pseudo real closed fields, pseudo p-adically closed fields and NTP2 . Annals of Pure and Applied Logic , vol. 168 (2017), no. 1, pp. 191–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montenegro, S., Onshuus, A., and Simon, P., Stabilizers, $\text{NTP}_{2}$ groups with $\text{f}$ -generics, and prc fields. Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, vol. 19 (2020), no. 3, pp. 821–853. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474801800021X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, F., On a problem of formal logic . Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society , vol. s2-30 (1930), no. 1, pp. 264–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T., Infinite stable fields are Artin–Schreier closed, unpublished, 2000.Google Scholar
Shelah, S., Classification Theory and the Number of Nonisomorphic Models , Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 92, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
Shelah, S., Strongly dependent theories . Israel Journal of Mathematics , vol. 204 (2005), pp. 1–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, P., A Guide to NIP Theories , Lecture Notes in Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar