In the study of the arithmetic degrees the $\omega \text {-REA}$ sets play a role analogous to the role the r.e. degrees play in the study of the Turing degrees. However, much less is known about the arithmetic degrees and the role of the $\omega \text {-REA}$ sets in that structure than about the Turing degrees. Indeed, even basic questions such as the existence of an $\omega \text {-REA}$ set of minimal arithmetic degree are open. This paper makes progress on this question by demonstrating that some promising approaches inspired by the analogy with the r.e. sets fail to show that no $\omega \text {-REA}$ set is arithmetically minimal. Finally, it constructs a $\prod ^0_{2}$ singleton of minimal arithmetic degree. Not only is this a result of considerable interest in its own right, constructions of $\prod ^0_{2}$ singletons often pave the way for constructions of $\omega \text {-REA}$ sets with similar properties. Along the way, a number of interesting results relating arithmetic reducibility and rates of growth are established.

Goodstein’s principle is arguably the first purely number-theoretic statement known to be independent of Peano arithmetic. It involves sequences of natural numbers which at first appear to diverge, but eventually decrease to zero. These sequences are defined relative to a notation system based on exponentiation for the natural numbers. In this article, we provide a self-contained and modern analysis of Goodstein’s principle, obtaining some variations and improvements. We explore notions of optimality for notation systems and apply them to the classical Goodstein process and to a weaker variant based on multiplication rather than exponentiation. In particular, we introduce the notion of base-change maximality, and show how it leads to far-reaching extensions of Goodstein’s result. We moreover show that by varying the initial base of the Goodstein process, one readily obtains independence results for each of the fragments $\mathsf {I}\Sigma _n$ of Peano arithmetic.

Descriptive set theory and computability theory are closely-related fields of logic; both are oriented around a notion of descriptive complexity. However, the two fields typically consider objects of very different sizes; computability theory is principally concerned with subsets of the naturals, while descriptive set theory is interested primarily in subsets of the reals. In this paper, we apply a generalization of computability theory, admissible recursion theory, to consider the relative complexity of notions that are of interest in descriptive set theory. In particular, we examine the perfect set property, determinacy, the Baire property, and Lebesgue measurability. We demonstrate that there is a separation of descriptive complexity between the perfect set property and determinacy for analytic sets of reals; we also show that the Baire property and Lebesgue measurability are both equivalent in complexity to the property of simply being a Borel set, for $\boldsymbol {\Sigma ^{1}_{2}}$ sets of reals.

It is shown that the determinacy of $G_{\delta \sigma }$ games of length $\omega ^2$ is equivalent to the existence of a transitive model of ${\mathsf {KP}} + {\mathsf {AD}} + \Pi _1\textrm {-MI}_{\mathbb {R}}$ containing $\mathbb {R}$ . Here, $\Pi _1\textrm {-MI}_{\mathbb {R}}$ is the axiom asserting that every monotone $\Pi _1$ operator on the real numbers has an inductive fixpoint.

Extending Aanderaa’s classical result that $\pi ^{1}_{1} < \sigma ^{1}_{1}$ , we determine the order between any two patterns of iterated $\Sigma ^{1}_{1}$ - and $\Pi ^{1}_{1}$ -reflection on ordinals. We show that this order of linear reflection is a prewellordering of length $\omega ^{\omega }$ . This requires considering the relationship between linear and some non-linear reflection patterns, such as $\sigma \wedge \pi $ , the pattern of simultaneous $\Sigma ^{1}_{1}$ - and $\Pi ^{1}_{1}$ -reflection. The proofs involve linking the lengths of $\alpha $ -recursive wellorderings to various forms of stability and reflection properties satisfied by ordinals $\alpha $ within standard and non-standard models of set theory.

We characterize the determinacy of $F_\sigma $ games of length $\omega ^2$ in terms of determinacy assertions for short games. Specifically, we show that $F_\sigma $ games of length $\omega ^2$ are determined if, and only if, there is a transitive model of ${\mathsf {KP}}+{\mathsf {AD}}$ containing $\mathbb {R}$ and reflecting $\Pi _1$ facts about the next admissible set.

As a consequence, one obtains that, over the base theory ${\mathsf {KP}} + {\mathsf {DC}} + ``\mathbb {R}$ exists,” determinacy for $F_\sigma $ games of length $\omega ^2$ is stronger than ${\mathsf {AD}}$ , but weaker than ${\mathsf {AD}} + \Sigma _1$ -separation.

In a recent paper by M. Rathjen and the present author it has been shown that the statement “every normal function has a derivative” is equivalent to $\Pi ^1_1$ -bar induction. The equivalence was proved over $\mathbf {ACA_0}$ , for a suitable representation of normal functions in terms of dilators. In the present paper, we show that the statement “every normal function has at least one fixed point” is equivalent to $\Pi ^1_1$ -induction along the natural numbers.

We prove, in $\text{ZF}+\boldsymbol{{\it\Sigma}}_{2}^{1}$-determinacy, that, for any analytic equivalence relation $E$, the following three statements are equivalent: (1) $E$ does not have perfectly many classes, (2) $E$ satisfies hyperarithmetic-is-recursive on a cone, and (3) relative to some oracle, for every equivalence class $[Y]_{E}$ we have that a real $X$ computes a member of the equivalence class if and only if ${\it\omega}_{1}^{X}\geqslant {\it\omega}_{1}^{[Y]}$. We also show that the implication from (1) to (2) is equivalent to the existence of sharps over $ZF$.